Down and Out in Paris and London

I have never worked in the food-service industry. I did work at a grocery store for a few years long ago, but I’m sure that doesn’t count. Nevertheless, I can see why the late Anthony Bourdain loved George Orwell’s Down and Out in Paris and London. Orwell recounts with grease and grime and exhaustion his time spent penniless in those two cities. In Paris, he works at a hotel and a restaurant that for some mysterious reason achieved success. He worked there as a plongeur [a dishwasher and someone who does odd-jobs at a hotel or restaurant—a grunt]. Orwell’s descriptions are vivid:

It was amusing to look round the filthy scullery and think that only a double door was between us and the dining-room. There sat customers in all their splendour—spotless table-cloths, bowls of flowers, mirrors and gilt cornices and painted cherubim; and here, just a few feet away, we in our disgusting filth. For it really was disgusting filth. There was no time to sweep the floor till evening, and we slithered about in a compound of soapy water, lettuce-leaves, torn paper and trampled food. (p. 68)

 Anyone who has read Bourdain’s Kitchen Confidential has read something sort of similar. Bourdain and Orwell seek to capture life among the dirty dishes and grease, both writers strikingly describing the stress, the chaos, the meltdowns. One thinks of the series The Bear.

But Orwell’s treatment is far more dismal. Bourdain and the characters in The Bear lead charmed lives compared to what Orwell serves up. The plongeur’s life consists of 15-17-hour days, very low pay, non-stop work, and most unpleasant conditions. It’s the kind of work that if you do it long enough, you’ll die. One thinks of Karl Marx’s descriptions of factory life.

A gem in Orwell’s Down and Out in Paris and London is Chapter 22 (p.115-21). He lays out a cogent analysis of the plongeur’s life, the perceived luxury and necessity of the hotel and restaurant system, and nicely strikes some socialist notes—which Orwell excels at. The core of Orwell’s analysis is as follows:

I believe that this instinct to perpetuate useless work is, at bottom, simply fear of the mob. The mob (the thought runs) are such low animals that they would be dangerous if they had leisure; it is safer to keep them too busy to think.

The pages dedicated to this time in London are quite good. He offers an equally thought-provoking meditation on beggars. In it he says:

Then the question arises, Why are beggars despised?—for they are despised, universally. I believe it is for the simple reason that they fail to earn a decent living. In practice nobody cares whether work is useful or useless, productive or parasitic; the sole thing demanded is that it shall be profitable. … Money has become the grand test of virtue. (p. 174)

Ol’ George hits it on the head on a regular basis. He just described this culture. It matters not what you do. What matters is the square-footage of your house and where you go on vacations. Your career or job? Who cares. Nice countertops! Don’t talk about politics, but you can talk about your remodeling of the kitchen or that new deck for all eternity. Interesting priorities. Interesting culture.

If you’re reading Down and Out, pay particular attention to Chapters 22, 31, and 36. In Chapter 36, Orwell provides an excellent meditation on “tramps.” It’s really good.

I try to be generous with the homeless (unhoused). I can’t say I give a couple bucks every time, but I try to. It’s fashionable to enter into a discussion if we should give or not. I always find these discussions fascinating. Everyone becomes an intellectual all of a sudden. They become enlightened: what would be in the person’s best interest? I have heard someone say, “Someone is probably making them stand there at the stoplight; so I’m not going to support that person!” In this mindset, giving nothing is an act of virtue: “I’m not supporting this person’s exploitation.” Wow. The acrobatics one will perform to feel like a good person. Where did they get this imaginary individual doing the exploiting? From their imagination. It’s fiction; but fictions that flatter ourselves are powerful things.

And then there is the open contempt: “Get a job.” You’re poor, homeless, and dirty. You are therefore a piece of filth and sub-human. Disgusting. This is simply a more direct—and frankly honest—disdain. The person is simply saying, “You’re inferior to me. You’re beneath me.”

Orwell reminds us that many of the people we look down upon are human beings who lack money and a job. We should not confuse cause and effect: Why are they dirty and standing at the stoplight? You’re looking at the effect, not the cause.

Poverty could be eradicated in this country. It’s how we vote that’s the real issue. In which case, the problem is us. If we voted better, that person probably wouldn’t be standing dirty at the stoplight. Do we have intellectual, deeply concerned discussions about that? Nope. It’s less flattering; best to create an invisible exploitative person to make me feel better.

So, yeah, read some Orwell beyond Animal Farm. Homage to Catalonia and Down and Out are terrific reads. And I recommend them highly.

https://www.amazon.com/Down-Paris-London-George-Orwell/dp/015626224X