Youngsters at Bibb Mill No. 1, 1909 (Lewis Hine)
Was it dangerous for children to work in textiles factories?
During the Gilded Age, the South became the world’s major producer of cotton and the North became a manufacturing powerhouse for textiles. The textile industry was a major source of jobs for immigrants and children because of the faulty machines. Children would work in factories as bobbin boys, bringing bobbins to the women at looms when they called for them (http://www.portal.state.pa.us/portal/server.pt/community/things/4280/child_labor/478193). The children were also put in danger, surrounded by huge machines that only they could fix because of their small hands (https://www.boundless.com/u-s-history/textbooks/boundless-u-s-history-textbook/race-empire-and-culture-in-the-gilded-age-1870-1900-21/labor-and-domestic-tensions-162/child-labor-870-8841/).
In Lewis W. Hine’s photograph of a Gilded Age textile mill, two boys balance on the edge of a machine, working intently. One boy does not wear shoes, tattered shorts and a ripped shirt. His hat is weathered and too big for him, but does not seem to break his focus on his task. The second boy who stands farther from the camera wears a dirty pair of overalls, worn-out shoes and a dirty shirt. The second boy’s cap is too small for his head and faces the camera, blankly staring into the lens to mentally relieve himself from his mind-numbing job.
The boys stand on the metal basket of a textile machine that appears to be weaving thread of some kind. The machine is dirty and the metal is worn and rusting. The machine fills the long row and more machines flank it to the left and right but are empty and show no sign of running. Natural light appears to be the only source of light in the room but shines brightly on the boys’ backs, they also appear to be the only ones on this floor of the factory.
The safety regulations of the textile mills of the Gilded Age are nearly non-existent. Small children are being left on massive factory floors that have multiple machines running and in close proximity to each other. The boys’ jobs are to replace the broken threads and bobbins in these dangerous machines. To make things worse while sticking their hands in these running machines to fix a pin the boys had to balance on the basket like frame hanging off the machine.
Wheaton Glass Works, Millville, N.J. 1909, Lewis Hine
Factories had a quota to meet every day or they were shut down by the head company, but how difficult was it to work in the factory conditions provided by the large corporations?
In 1895, the average income of an urban male worker was only about $400 a year, this forced children to work in the harsh conditions of factories such as the glassworks (http://www.eastconn.org/tah/1011KD1_PhotoAnalysis.pdf). THe glassworks was incredibly prosperous during the gilded age, especially for companies like the one in Wheaton, but workers did not reap the rewards of their success The wealthy business owners and controllers of the corporations assumed mass amounts of money while families suffered. The lack of money in the lower class is what led to the increase in child labor. Parents were not cruel but needed the money to have food or shelter (http://www.pegglass.com/downloads/A%20Brief%20History%20of%20Glassmaking.pdf).
In this photograph from Lewis Hine’s collection of child labor eight boys sit and stand, working in a new Jersey glass blowing factory. There are two to be focused on and for specific reasons, a boy on the far right stands back to the camera, tending to a machine. He has large work boots on, a small cap, a heavy long sleeve shirt, and dirty work pants. The other boy is notable for his expression. He sits on the far left, holding on to a bottle with a pair of pliers. His face is lifeless and exhausted, he hunches over slightly and all of his features fall as if he is barely hanging on to consciousness.
Around the dark, warehouse-like room the broken glass and unkempt work stations depict the lack of safety within the workplace. A lot of the equipment in the room appears to be older and worn down, there is no order to the placement of the machines and little safe space for workers. broken glass and other such debris is piled in some places on the floors creating sections that are untouchable, other areas have the glass spread around. The background of the photo and area behind the main machines is very dark, implying that the factory is being lit by a large source of natural light which could cause some places to be obscured by shadow.
While only a direct opinion from a worker of the glass works would truly answer this question, it can be implied that it was very difficult working the glassworks. To start, the space is quite small for work and is only being lit by a source of natural light, which forces child laborers to work extra hard during the day as night work is not available. The dangerous conditions of the factory and unkempt machinery alone would make getting work done difficult. Workers could have gotten hurt and product might have been broken with such terrible conditions.
Factories had a quota to meet every day or they were shut down by the head company, but how difficult was it to work in the factory conditions provided by the large corporations?
In 1895, the average income of an urban male worker was only about $400 a year, this forced children to work in the harsh conditions of factories such as the glassworks (http://www.eastconn.org/tah/1011KD1_PhotoAnalysis.pdf). THe glassworks was incredibly prosperous during the gilded age, especially for companies like the one in Wheaton, but workers did not reap the rewards of their success The wealthy business owners and controllers of the corporations assumed mass amounts of money while families suffered. The lack of money in the lower class is what led to the increase in child labor. Parents were not cruel but needed the money to have food or shelter (http://www.pegglass.com/downloads/A%20Brief%20History%20of%20Glassmaking.pdf).
In this photograph from Lewis Hine’s collection of child labor eight boys sit and stand, working in a new Jersey glass blowing factory. There are two to be focused on and for specific reasons, a boy on the far right stands back to the camera, tending to a machine. He has large work boots on, a small cap, a heavy long sleeve shirt, and dirty work pants. The other boy is notable for his expression. He sits on the far left, holding on to a bottle with a pair of pliers. His face is lifeless and exhausted, he hunches over slightly and all of his features fall as if he is barely hanging on to consciousness.
Around the dark, warehouse-like room the broken glass and unkempt work stations depict the lack of safety within the workplace. A lot of the equipment in the room appears to be older and worn down, there is no order to the placement of the machines and little safe space for workers. broken glass and other such debris is piled in some places on the floors creating sections that are untouchable, other areas have the glass spread around. The background of the photo and area behind the main machines is very dark, implying that the factory is being lit by a large source of natural light which could cause some places to be obscured by shadow.
While only a direct opinion from a worker of the glass works would truly answer this question, it can be implied that it was very difficult working the glassworks. To start, the space is quite small for work and is only being lit by a source of natural light, which forces child laborers to work extra hard during the day as night work is not available. The dangerous conditions of the factory and unkempt machinery alone would make getting work done difficult. Workers could have gotten hurt and product might have been broken with such terrible conditions.
Men Striking (anonymous)
http://blais.wikispaces.com/The+Gilded+Age+(C)
Strikes were sometimes long spectacles that took long periods of time to work out, but overall, were strikes effective and taken seriously?
The gilded age was home to the corporations of Andrew Carnegie and George Pullman. These large corporations relied heavily on the working class, assembly line worker but paid them terribly (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/chicago/peopleevents/p_pullman.html). Workers worked for ten hour shifts, six days a week and sometimes more depending on your boss and job (http://www.shmoop.com/gilded-age/statistics.html). Even with putting in sixty hours a week wages were low enough that people could not afford to live, and were thrust into the streets. This led to outcry; the creation of unions and organized strikes to make change in companies.
This black and white photograph was taken on a city street, facing the line of six visible men marching or striking. Each man is dressed similarly in a white, clean shirt and black slacks or khakis. the center of the photographic image lies with the two visible signs around two men’s necks. A man standing mid-center has a sign that reads: “AMIF on strike of living wage” the other says: “Down grade”. All the men that are taking part in the strike have serious demeanors about them but there are not unkind. It is as if they know they will get what they want eventually but continue to strike.
Behind the line of men is what can only be assumed as the front of a factory. The factory’s door is flanked by huge arrangements of windows that vary between open and closed. It can be assumed that the men protesting work in that factory. It
It is impossible to find out for sure if this specific and vague depiction of protesters has succeeded but based on the evidence provided an inference can be made. It seems as though the demeanor of the group of protestors is firm, but pleasant and effective. The gravity of the situation while very heavy, as their families lives may be at stake does not come off as very serious, but confident. The determination, position of the group, and size made me believe that these workers got the higher living wages they so dearly needed.
http://blais.wikispaces.com/The+Gilded+Age+(C)
Strikes were sometimes long spectacles that took long periods of time to work out, but overall, were strikes effective and taken seriously?
The gilded age was home to the corporations of Andrew Carnegie and George Pullman. These large corporations relied heavily on the working class, assembly line worker but paid them terribly (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/chicago/peopleevents/p_pullman.html). Workers worked for ten hour shifts, six days a week and sometimes more depending on your boss and job (http://www.shmoop.com/gilded-age/statistics.html). Even with putting in sixty hours a week wages were low enough that people could not afford to live, and were thrust into the streets. This led to outcry; the creation of unions and organized strikes to make change in companies.
This black and white photograph was taken on a city street, facing the line of six visible men marching or striking. Each man is dressed similarly in a white, clean shirt and black slacks or khakis. the center of the photographic image lies with the two visible signs around two men’s necks. A man standing mid-center has a sign that reads: “AMIF on strike of living wage” the other says: “Down grade”. All the men that are taking part in the strike have serious demeanors about them but there are not unkind. It is as if they know they will get what they want eventually but continue to strike.
Behind the line of men is what can only be assumed as the front of a factory. The factory’s door is flanked by huge arrangements of windows that vary between open and closed. It can be assumed that the men protesting work in that factory. It
It is impossible to find out for sure if this specific and vague depiction of protesters has succeeded but based on the evidence provided an inference can be made. It seems as though the demeanor of the group of protestors is firm, but pleasant and effective. The gravity of the situation while very heavy, as their families lives may be at stake does not come off as very serious, but confident. The determination, position of the group, and size made me believe that these workers got the higher living wages they so dearly needed.
Andrew Carnegie in his home (Anonymous)
Once called “The Richest Man in the World,” Andrew Carnegie was a Scottish immigrant who made his living in the Steel industry but after becoming rich was he a kind man?
Picture brought to you by: http://diva.library.cmu.edu/webapp/carnegie/
The gilded age was defined by it’s collection of ruthless and rich owners of the large corporations that dominated the economy. Andrew Carnegie was one of the handful of robber barons who essentially owned their industry, in his case: steel. When Carnegie came to America from Dunfermline, Scotland in 1835 he worked in a textile factory as a bobbin boy, only making $1.20 a week (http://www.biography.com/people/andrew-carnegie-9238756). This was incredibly low pay but Carnegie slowly made his way up the ranks and eventually came to give his own workers that terrible, non-livable pay. The average pay for the average 60 hour week was ten cents an hour for an industrial worker such as those that worked for Carnegie, who himself knew the hardships of working to merely live (http://www.shmoop.com/gilded-age/statistics.html).
In this black and white photograph, Andrew Carnegie is seated within his home and at his personal desk, facing the camera. He has a serious, and slightly unhappy demeanor such as that he is angry that he is being photographed or he does not like the cameraman. In his right hand is a pen and his left grips the arm of his wooden desk chair loosely. His legs are crossed and show off his shiny black dress shoes. He is wearing a heavy sport jacket, possibly made of wool, a white dress shirt beneath it, and dress pants. His entire body shows power and dominance over others. His wealth is not only implanted in his clothes and their cleanliness but on his face and attitude.
The desk and walls that frame Carnegie’s body in this photograph can be simply described as cluttered. The wall behind him is covered, nearly completely by seven photographs of possible family members, lovers, friends, his desk is not much different. The top shelf of his multi-level desk is completely filled with pictures, but that bottom half is instead cluttered by papers, files, and other assorted office supplies. In the right corner of the room is a clear sign of a businessman, the large black filing cabinet, Carnegie’s is significantly large and has more than twenty different drawers pictured.
While only his friend’s or even acquaintances could tell of Carnegie’s personality but he generally strikes me, based on the facts as a hard and stern man. Others may say otherwise with his visible love for his family or something or group in the photos that line his wall, but his current expression provides a different view. His beady little eyes and clear white beard pierce the air and cut right the point. He seems unhappy, impatient, and based on his grand success, he has to be a treacherous and ruthless businessman. Andrew Carnegie was like all the other robber barons: greedy and unhappy.
Once called “The Richest Man in the World,” Andrew Carnegie was a Scottish immigrant who made his living in the Steel industry but after becoming rich was he a kind man?
Picture brought to you by: http://diva.library.cmu.edu/webapp/carnegie/
The gilded age was defined by it’s collection of ruthless and rich owners of the large corporations that dominated the economy. Andrew Carnegie was one of the handful of robber barons who essentially owned their industry, in his case: steel. When Carnegie came to America from Dunfermline, Scotland in 1835 he worked in a textile factory as a bobbin boy, only making $1.20 a week (http://www.biography.com/people/andrew-carnegie-9238756). This was incredibly low pay but Carnegie slowly made his way up the ranks and eventually came to give his own workers that terrible, non-livable pay. The average pay for the average 60 hour week was ten cents an hour for an industrial worker such as those that worked for Carnegie, who himself knew the hardships of working to merely live (http://www.shmoop.com/gilded-age/statistics.html).
In this black and white photograph, Andrew Carnegie is seated within his home and at his personal desk, facing the camera. He has a serious, and slightly unhappy demeanor such as that he is angry that he is being photographed or he does not like the cameraman. In his right hand is a pen and his left grips the arm of his wooden desk chair loosely. His legs are crossed and show off his shiny black dress shoes. He is wearing a heavy sport jacket, possibly made of wool, a white dress shirt beneath it, and dress pants. His entire body shows power and dominance over others. His wealth is not only implanted in his clothes and their cleanliness but on his face and attitude.
The desk and walls that frame Carnegie’s body in this photograph can be simply described as cluttered. The wall behind him is covered, nearly completely by seven photographs of possible family members, lovers, friends, his desk is not much different. The top shelf of his multi-level desk is completely filled with pictures, but that bottom half is instead cluttered by papers, files, and other assorted office supplies. In the right corner of the room is a clear sign of a businessman, the large black filing cabinet, Carnegie’s is significantly large and has more than twenty different drawers pictured.
While only his friend’s or even acquaintances could tell of Carnegie’s personality but he generally strikes me, based on the facts as a hard and stern man. Others may say otherwise with his visible love for his family or something or group in the photos that line his wall, but his current expression provides a different view. His beady little eyes and clear white beard pierce the air and cut right the point. He seems unhappy, impatient, and based on his grand success, he has to be a treacherous and ruthless businessman. Andrew Carnegie was like all the other robber barons: greedy and unhappy.