Analyzation of "Homes of the London Poor"

"Homes of the London Poor" was written by Octavia Hill. She was practical, no-nonsense woman who believed that reform should come by using the idea behind "Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day. Teach a man how to fish, and you feed him for life." This piece of literature is more like a letter to a business friend or an explanatory essay describing her attempt to reform housing starting on a small, personal level. The time and place is most likely after the 1850's in London, England. The audience could be a business friend or to an editor of a journal or a journalist. It discusses Octavia's venture as tenant owner, land lady, and social observer. Her multi-role to the tenants prove to make an interesting discussion, as Ms. Hill invested a great amount of money to fix up the buildings and put trust into the tenants to help maintain the structure. She began classes and established get-togethers in a common room. Octavia Hill set out to prove that reform could be done without wasting tax dollars and that giving an inch won't sacrifice a mile. By being a more involved landlady, she showed that attitudes and lives change. The significance of this document shows a more grassroots movement to effect change. People, especially women, were taking matters into their own hands and providing the evidence and solutions to address the problems. Octavia Hill wanted to provide dignity and a means for social advancement to the youth of London's poor families. In my belief, she was mostly successful. She was able to set up classes for the children of her tenants and in her opinion (which may or may not be reliable) she was able to offer up some way to give "prestige and honor" to the families by personally inviting them to events. Although she and many other philanthropists of the time were more about going and making a direct difference, not many of today's philanthropists can say the same. I believe there are many reasons behind this, and perhaps one of the man ones is the fact that many philanthropic foundations are set up to cover a whole spectrum of "charitable" causes. Besides, many philanthropists just divy out the direct social work to others.