Everybody's Business Is Nobody's Business

by Daniel Defoe

This book was converted from its physical edition to the digital format by a community of volunteers. You may find it for free on the web. Purchase of the Kindle edition includes wireless delivery.

Genres: Fiction, Business

31 pages, Kindle Edition

First published January 1, 1725

About the author

Daniel Defoe was an English novelist, journalist, merchant, pamphleteer and spy. He is most famous for his novel Robinson Crusoe, published in 1719, which is claimed to be second only to the Bible in its number of translations. He has been seen as one of the earliest proponents of the English novel, and helped to popularise the form in Britain with others such as Aphra Behn and Samuel Richardson. Defoe wrote many political tracts, was often in trouble with the authorities, and spent a period in prison. Intellectuals and political leaders paid attention to his fresh ideas and sometimes consulted him.
Defoe was a prolific and versatile writer, producing more than three hundred works—books, pamphlets, and journals—on diverse topics, including politics, crime, religion, marriage, psychology and the supernatural. He was also a pioneer of business journalism and economic journalism.

Reviews

[Mitch Reynolds · Rating 1 out of 5]

Everybody’s Business is Nobody’s Business (1725) by Daniel Defoe is short read.

This book is basically Defoe’s opinions on workers and his suggestions for what should be done about the things he perceived as problematic issues in this area. I could not stand this book. I spent half the book trying to find some kind of redeeming quality to it and couldn’t. The only thing I could find redeeming I suppose is that he can write well and it is put together in a writer way.

But as far as the content, it was terrible. He sounded like a bit of a dickhead to be honest who had prejudices against working-class people and women. Being someone who falls into both of those groups, he came across incredibly stuck up, ignorant and in his own world quite frankly. He didn’t seem to have any understanding of people outside of anyone who wasn’t like himself and it felt like a bad reflection of writers in a way which annoyed me as a writer because we certainly wouldn’t all share his prejudices. Sometimes as well as being a man and a richer person, it did feel like he thought he was above everyone because of his status as a writer and that certainly didn’t come over as cute at all.

It was my introduction to Defoe’s work but it doesn’t put me off reading his other work. I read work by authors who have questionable views a lot. I base it on the work, not the writer because I’m a writer myself and that’s the fairest thing to do but it didn’t paint a great image of the man behind the work for me. Look, it was his opinions. I’m glad he got the opportunity to express them but the views in my opinion were really disgusting and self-entitled.

[Jessica Roberts · Rating 3 out of 5]

My. My.

There were times when I was laughing, then I wondered if this guy had just arrived from the country. And THEN I wondered if anyone took him seriously. I don't know enough about the period to know. Still, a bachelor's rant with odd suggestions for solutions for eliminating poverty is amusing. Kinda.

[Sem · Rating 4 out of 5]

Servant-wenches caballing together, country Joans turned into pert sluts who drink tea and take snuff, prinked up strumpets who make neither good whores nor good servants, streets crawling with shoe-cleaners... Egad!

[Agregado Mary Renee Katriel Bustamante · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book was quite boring to read. Because it was written as a documentary and was in first-person narrative, the story was uninteresting and lengthy. However, I liked how the narrator used old British slang such as "Nay". It gave the story some texture and showed the time period. The story is based in England during the nineteenth century, where there was a large poor population. The book was almost like a rant about how rude the poor can be and how corrupt the society is. However, it was all-rounded, meaning to say that the book talked about the political, social and economic problems of London. It even mentioned the unstable London Bridge and how the government refused to abolish it. All in all, the story was educational and showed the perspective of how wealthy gentlemen thought of maids two centuries ago. However, the story could have been more interesting if it had a better climax and conclusion, more like a story and less like a documentary.

[Kai (CuriousCompass) · Rating 1 out of 5]

Racism, slut shaming, being angry at women for wanting a living wage, thinking how dare these maids ask for a raise, wear silks, or drink high tea? These foul whores tempt good men away from their families! Naive men can't tell their ass from their appetite and it's not fair these indecent she-beast seductresses are ruining families!

If this guy hadn't been dead for centuries already I'd be rooting for him to drop any minute now.

[Aaron Schuschu · Rating 3 out of 5]

Knowing what the title means today, the subject matter came off as a total non- sequitur in relation to the title. As for the subject matter itself, getting manipulative to get by isn’t for the best, but who hasn’t?

[Alice · Rating 3 out of 5]

Obviously Defoe believes that this is His Business

Wow, what a great rant against women servants, footmen and shoe shiners. This is the Rush Limbaugh of England in 1725. The maids come from the countryside and they immediately raise their wages, start wearing fancy silk dresses instead of wool. horrors, these women even start affairs with the Master's apprentice, his son, or even the MASTER HIMSELF! This of course wrecks his marriage, family and even his estate at which point she dumps a bastard on him and leaves. All I can say is how horrible those poor rich men are treated by wicked female servants.

Of course he supplies several suggestions for keeping these people in line. I actually think that this pamphlet lead to the development of servants letters of recommendation that were later required to get another position. He's also in a fury concerning what is called blackguards or japanners who seem to be shoe shine men and boys who he believes are all lazy scoundrels, thieves and gamblers. The term blackguards as a pejorative meaning scoundrel must have come from this period. This is a very interesting view of the class beliefs values and practices of the early 1700's by a English gentleman.

Daniel Defoe was a prolific author of both fiction (Robinson Crusoe and Moll Flanders are his best known) and non fiction (history, pamphlets, travel, and articles). In his personal life he was known for switching political sides, pretending to be of modest means while acquiring homes, money and income, and often exaggerating if not lying when it suited him. A interesting read historically for a taste of the times.

[Brent McGregor · Rating 2 out of 5]

Limousine Liberal before his time.

DeFoe was outraged that hard working people from the country came to London to work as servants and Japanners (shoe shiners) looking for opportunity. He criticized them for gouging the public and demanded regulations to keep the commoners, or in the Latin tongue, the Vulgar, under heel.
Adam Smith was just publishing his own books on Moral Sentiments, which is the foundation to Wealth of Nations, his second and world changing book.
Had DeFoe bothered to ask, he would have found out that Servant-Wenches are not commodities, but rather human capital. They have economic value and the more in demand a Servant-Wench is, the higher her value is, depending on her scarcity.
Judging from DeFoe's L.L. attitude not many people wished to work for him and so he probably had to pay more along with many of his pals.
Poor Daniel, had he been living in the US today he'd find a seemingly endless supply of under the table slaves willing to work for free. Just ask anyone in Hollywood.

[James · Rating 2 out of 5]

Guy was big into regulation.