Diet
A typical 1904 diet consisted predominantly of bread and tea. Milk and bacon were also considered part of the working class diet, however they were a rarity. Vegetables, like potatoes or cabbage, were considered luxury items if they were even included. Some doctors believed that the replacement of buttermilk with tea led to an increase in ulcers and digestive disorders among the Dublin population. Due to the sparse components of the common Dubliner’s diet, it is no surprise that the working class was easily susceptible to disease and illness (O’Brien 1982, 165). With regards to the play Dublin by Lamplight in Act One, Scene Four, Frank asks his brother Willy for some milk and then tea, while proceeding to find a slab of bread under a thrown towel. Therefore, in one scene West manages to expose the staple diet items of the working class Dubliner. Also, alcoholism not only played a huge role in the level of poverty that some families felt but also in the diets of many men. Although drink money was not necessarily part of the budget, it was nonetheless simply taken from the budget (Daly 1984, 81). Throughout the play there are a number of scenes that take place at the bar. As a result, the setting of the pub and the excessive consumption of alcohol plays a substantial role in illustrating the type of lifestyle that undoubtedly affected the health of many Dubliners.
Births and Deaths
In the year 1899 infant mortality rates were extremely high with every 1000 babies born, 185 resulted in death. Numbers stayed relatively consistent up until 1913 both in Dublin County and the registered city and suburb areas (O’Brien 1982, 107). With child mortality rates being one of the major problems of public health at this time, it is interesting that Michael West chose to end the play with Maggie standing by herself pregnant with the lines, “And inside her a new life was beating out its pitiful existence. What future had she, had any of them, in this dark place?”. Perhaps West chose these lines to emphasize that in 1904 carrying a child did not always result in new life with child mortality rates so high. Furthermore, starting in the year 1841, it became compulsory in Ireland to maintain a record of the number of births and deaths per year (Daly 1984, 240). This historical information is relevant to Dublin by Lamplight and is illustrated in the scene where Willy wrongly identifies a body at the morgue as his brother Frank’s. The Castle Agent then easily accepts this identification as correct, no questions asked. This scene not only suggests that unidentified bodies were common, but also that this newly enforced regulation of identifying and recording dead bodies was not strictly followed in the beginning.
Living Conditions and the Spread of Disease
During the years of 1879 and 1899, an important project for Dublin was replacing privies with water closets in housing complexes, thus minimizing the spread of contagious disease. In some cases if there was no backyard or ashpit available, privies would be formed in unhealthy places such as in the home (Prunty 1998, 81). This relates to Dublin by Lamplight because in Act One, Scene Four the stage directions call for Frank to “make the toilet where he violently pukes”. Perhaps West was not only trying to minimize props, but also trying to allude to the unsanitary conditions that led to serious public health problems in Dublin.
By 1910, there were approximately 900 streets lined with unsanitary living arrangements providing accommodation for approximately 12,000 people. Reports claimed that with even the slightest wind, such filthy, decomposed, impure air would be spread around the slums in which many children ran ramped carrying bacteria with them (Prunty 1998, 167). This idea of filth and illness being carried around by people is included in the play Dublin by Lamplight in Act Three, Scene Twelve where Eva is being harassed by a vagrant voice to which she replies, “Let go of me, you dirty, dirty filth!”. This statement serves not only as a figure of speech, but also provides an interesting contrast between the interactions of the sick working class with the more upper/middle class activist.
-Michelle Kelly