Daniel Defoe's Diary of the Plague Year offers the modern reader an insight into the tense atmosphere of plague-infested urban London illnesses. However, the most important insights we gain from HF's narrative are his observations of human behavior, observations that can be applied universally to those who become part of the epidemic environment. HF's diary addresses questions regarding God's wrath as the ultimate cause of the plague, discussions about the means of transmission and treatment of the plague, the human desire for an explainable theory of its cause, as well as the class consciousness that becomes especially overt during the plague epidemic of 1665, they help convey Defoe's goal of presenting this particular plague epidemic in London as a multidimensional and complicated circumstance. Therefore, the modern reader is less likely to homogenize and simplify the experiences of the plague victims, thus leaving the narrative with a greater understanding of the disease's enormous effects on humanity. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay As you examine A Journal of the Plague Year, it becomes important to determine to what extent the plague is portrayed as a divine visitation or, conversely, how much as a natural disaster. At the time of the plague epidemic of 1665, God's wrath was the prevailing theory to explain the initial cause of the plague. In fact, 16 December 1720 was declared a National Day of Repentance, in the hope that human penance would counteract the effects of the plague, thus describing the strong religious beliefs of English society in this period. Defoe's narrator, HF, can represent the religious man of this period. In fact, he always carries the Bible with him and opens it to read spontaneous passages whenever he feels the need for external support and guidance. For example, when HF is contemplating whether to stay or flee to London during the plague epidemic of 1665, he randomly opens the Bible to Psalm 91 and finds support for his decision to stay, as he ultimately believes that the plague is the "Will of Heaven"1. However, we must not confuse Defoe's HF with a standard character who blindly accepts the reasons for the plague only in religious terms. Rather, HF makes great efforts to examine the multidimensional nature of the appearance of the plague of 1665. For example, HF states that "Nothing but the immediate Finger of God, nothing but the omnipotent Power could have done it"2. The plague is commonly attributed to the wrath of God. In fact, the London population of the time is widely convinced that "even the buboes are the blow of an angry deity"3. However, Defoe's HF does not unconditionally accept this explanation without examining other theories. For example, he accepts that one can also attempt to explain the plague through a scientific perspective. That is, the plague can be attributed to natural scientific causes. However, although HF acknowledges the potential scientific causes of the plague, he clarifies that even these "natural" scientific causes ultimately have God as their source4. HF's ambivalent views on God's wrath as a theory of authority over the cause of the plague can best be described as "orthodox rationalism" 5. In essence, although HF gives due recognition to the dominant theory of God's wrath as a cause of plague, does not fail to acknowledge at least other sources, thus giving the reader an idea of ​​his deliberative and rational personality, which makes him a distinct and credible plague narrator. In addition to investigating the causes behind the outbreak of the plague in London, it also becomes importantexamine the methods of its transmission. At this time, the debate over how the plague spreads is generally a binary between miasmatic and contagion theories. Today, it is general opinion that the plague is spread through fleas that become infected through rodents; however, this information does not become available until nearly a century after the plague appeared in London in 1665. The miasmatic view supports the idea that the plague is airborne, as it holds that the putrid air of an afflicted city carries the disease. However, Defoe rejects this miasmatic vision in favor of the contagion theory. Defoe's pro-contagion views manifest themselves throughout HF's fiction. He essentially believes that the poison of the plague resides in humans and not in the atmosphere. Thus, one can sympathize with HF's indignation at the careless behavior of ordinary people during the plague epidemic of 1665, when many people simply paid little or no attention to who or where they kept company. In fact HF observes that his opinion and the opinions of the doctors coincided, that: The Sick could not infect anyone except those who were within reach of the sick...[the Sick] breathed Death in every Place, and on every Body that approached them; indeed, their very clothes retained the infection, their hands infected the things they touched, especially if they were hot and sweaty"6. Thus, we can observe HF's strong adherence to the contagion theory. It becomes important to recognize the two main opinions on the means of transmission of the plague when examining HF's narrative, as it is his strong belief in the contagion view that lies behind his suggestions for the treatment and prevention of the plague Ironically, although HF firmly believed that the plague spreads as a human being to human being and not through the uncontainable air, he however also believes that the strength of the plague cannot be prevented. He offers the reader contradictory opinions on the two main methods of treatment of the plague then advocated, including closing houses and running away from the city. For example, although he himself decides to stay in the city because he believes that the plague is willed by God and is inevitable, he still supports the impractical option of mass evacuation from the city to escape the plague. HF states: "although Providence seemed to direct my conduct differently; yet it is my opinion... that the best doctor against the plague is to escape from it"7. Furthermore, although he believes that the plague is transmitted from person to person, he nevertheless believes it is useless to close homes to prevent the spread of the plague. At numerous points in the text it states that house closures are ineffective and counterproductive, as they cannot be applied effectively. For example, he describes: "I am now speaking of people made desperate by the fear of being shut up, and of escaping by stratagem or force, before or after being shut up, whose misery has not been lessened." , when they were exhausted, but unfortunately increased"8. Therefore, the HF does not advocate the closing of houses as a preventive measure against the plague. In essence, Defoe's narrator, HF, conveys justified but opposing views on the means of transmission and prevention of the plague. Perhaps the contradictory nature of HF is symbolic of his pragmatic and deliberative nature, which does not allow him to accept any concrete path of reasoning to perhaps better understand an incomprehensible epidemic. One of the most significant representations of the plague that HF ​​offers to his audience is the hunger for meaning prevalent in his disease-ridden environment In HF's narrative we are given evidence of the human need to visualize the force of the plague in the hope of extracting some kind of deeper meaning.from the epidemic. For example, HF tells how, even before the plague of 1665 really began, he discovered: an angel dressed in white, with a flaming sword in his hand, waving or brandishing it above his head. He described every part of the figure to life; he showed them movement and form; and the poor People entered into it so eagerly, and with such promptness; Yes, I see everything clearly, says one. There's the Sword, simpler than ever. Another saw the Angel. One saw his face and shouted: what a glorious creature he was! One saw one thing and the other another9. It is important to examine this crucial passage in HF's narrative as it allows the reader to gain great insight into the emergence of charlatanism and corruption during an already grim time. The HF demonstrates that many people are willing to take economic advantage of those who became more vulnerable during the plague period. For example, literary critic Natasha Rosow describes: The posts were plastered with fraudulent advertisements for “foolproof” preventative pills, “foolproof” preservatives, and “the Royalantidote.” Even some doctors were gripped by greed: "I give my advice to the poor for free, but not my medicine 10. We can observe how in general, during the plague, the atmosphere was one of fear of the unknown, where the victims of this fear were easily manipulated. Therefore, the inexplicable nature of the plague creates an enigmatic atmosphere, thus evoking a hunger for meaning in those affected, as demonstrated by the congregation gathered in the street trying to extract meaning from an imperceptible image the issues of class discriminations that emerge in Defoe's plague tale are undoubtedly significant. Although the precise reasons for the cause and spread of the plague have not been unanimously agreed upon in the context of the tale, it is nevertheless "generally agreed through experience that it is dirty , smelly and dirty". Overcrowded environments were particularly attractive for infection and that the plague was more widespread among the dirty poor”11. Of course, the belief that cases of plague were more frequent in the less affluent classes certainly led to class divisions and thus to a further consolidation of an existing class hierarchy. Thus, HF devotes a considerable portion of his narrative to sympathizing with the specific plight of the poorest people during the plague of 1665. Margaret Healy explains in her article "Defoe's Journal and the English Writing Tradition", that while HF rebukes the "useless mouths for their lack of foresight, poor agriculture and extravagance, at the same time shows admiration for their courage and dignity" 12. For example, HF includes the story of three men who escape the plague by fleeing to the countryside. HF praises their ingenuity and religious conviction stating that their plan is "a great model for every poor person to follow" 13. Therefore, it is evident that HF ​​feels great sympathy and responsibility for the poor as they are the most afflicted by the effects of the plague . Indeed, Defoe proposes in this story a mass evacuation from London to save the poor during the plague. Although this highly impractical suggestion is not implemented, we can still observe his concern for the poor. He gives us a further example of how the poor suffered the most when he describes how watchmen could be bribed. He states: As several people, I say, got out of their homes by a stratagem, after being locked up, so others got out by bribing the Guardians... I must confess, I thought so at the time, the most innocent bribery. , or corruption, of which any man might be guilty; and therefore he could not help but pity the poor Men14. Furthermore, according to Healy, Defoe believes that "it was public charity, not thecitizen credit, to save the poor and to maintain order in London in 1665" 15. Ultimately, Defoe emphasizes salvation for the poor as it is inevitably linked to the salvation of the entire plague-infested London. In conclusion, the issues of providence, causes, methods of treatment, the desire for meaning, and the class consciousness that emerges when studying HF's interpretations of the plague has applications that go beyond just the important 1665 visit to London. Daniel's text Defoe instead examines the transference of economic tensions between the aristocracy, the middle class, and the poor into moral discourse. HF's views and observations on plague-infested London shed light on our modern afflictions related to epidemics such as the spread of AIDS. The contemporary doctor Laurence Segel asks: "Can we honestly say that we have never fled, abandoned or ostracized the afflicted?"16 Ultimately the following statement from Albert Camus' The Plague rings true: "I know with certainty that each of us has the plague within himself; no one, no one on earth, is exempt from it"17.Note1 Daniel Defoe. Diary of the Plague Year. Edited with an introduction by Louis Landa. Oxford University Press: London, 1969.2 Daniel Defoe. Diary of the Plague Year. Edited with an introduction by Louis Landa. Oxford University Press: London, 1969. Page 244-45.3 Margaret Healy. "Defoe's Diary and the English Tradition of Plague Writing." 2003) 25-44. Copyright by Johns Hopkins University Press. Page 28.4 Daniel Defoe. Diary of the Plague Year. Edited by Louis Landa. Oxford University Press, 1969. Page XXIII (introduction). Daniel Defoe. Diary of the Plague Year. Edited by Louis Landa. Oxford University Press: London, 1969. Page xxiii (introduction).6 Daniel Defoe Diary of the Plague Year. introduction by Louis Landa. Oxford University Press: London, 1969. Page xxviii (introduction).7 Daniel Defoe. Diary of the plague year. Edited with an introduction by Louis Landa. Oxford University Press: London, 1969. Page xviii (introduction).8 Daniel Defoe. Diary of the plague year. Edited with an introduction by Louis Landa. Oxford University Press: London, 1969. Page 55.9 Daniel Defoe. Diary of the plague year. Edited with an introduction by Louis Landa. Oxford University Press: London, 1969. Page 22-23.10 Natasha Rosow. "Building authenticity". Studies in the Novel, volume 30, number 2 (summer 1998). Copyright 1998 by the University of North Texas. Page 2.11 Margaret Healy. "Defoe's Diary and the English Tradition of Plague Writing". Literature and Medicine 22, n.1 (Spring 2003) 25-44. Copyright by Johns Hopkins University Press. Page 34.12 Margaret Healy. "Defoe's Diary and the English Tradition of Plague Writing". Literature and Medicine 22, n.1 (Spring 2003) 25-44. Copyright by Johns Hopkins University Press. Page 37.13 Daniel Defoe. Diary of the plague year. Edited with an introduction by Louis Landa. Oxford University Press: London, 1969. Page 58.14 Daniel Defoe. Diary of the plague year. Edited with an introduction by Louis Landa. Oxford University Press: London, 1969. Page 57.15 Daniel Defoe. Diary of the plague year. Edited with an introduction by Louis Landa. Oxford University Press: London, 1969. Page 37.16 Laurence Segel --- physician and assistant vice-president for medical research and development, at a Toronto financial firm. Copyright 1997 Maclean Hunter Ltd. 20 November 2003.17 Albert Camus. The Plague. Trans. Stuart Gilbert. Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1948. Bibliography Camus, Albert. The Plague. Trans. Stuart Gilbert. Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1948.Defoe, Daniel. Diary of the plague year. Edited with an introduction by Louis Landa. Oxford University. 20, 2003.