During the 70s, New York City experienced a malevolent crisis that affected every New Yorker in some sort of way. The city suffered socially and economically. There were high unemployment rates that were increasing with each day that passed. Of course where there’s high unemployment, there’s crime spawning within the gaping void that’s left behind as a result. Roger Starr,a Housing Administrator, used this towards his advantage to facilitate his desires of “planned shrinkage”. He was a radical who was determined to get the job due to the belief of the city decreasing in size and population no matter what the circumstances were.
When his ideas were presented there was more of mass of negative reactions than there was positive. Not many were in favor of his idea particularly the minorities. Being that the minorities were already suffering enough from the postwar economic slump, this was depressing and distraught news presented to them. In attempts to make a stand, they were often ridiculed by some such as a journalist from the Daily News, a newspaper that was and is filled with highly subjective articles. On the 4th of March 1976, an article was written in the Daily News titled as “A Display of Ignorance”. The title itself already shows the discontentment towards minorities for whatever reason the author may possess. On this day, a regional conference was being held and Starr was planned to deliver a statement but a gathering of perturbed protestors were rallying outside and displaying their objection towards his “planned shrinkage”. All they wanted was for the idea not to go through because just as everyone else they had homes. Despite their lack of money being at their disposal, they were treated differently and often categorized as living in the slums. The ignorant of this article made their position proven by showing their demeaning and belittling conduct that was presented on the paper. They deemed the protestors as being boorish and using fascistic tactics to intervene also mentioning the “gagging” of Starr.
“A band of hooting, howling protestors invaded a regional conference on Tuesday…”
This could have been worded where it didn’t exhibit much of their animosity towards the group of individuals despite the author’s positioning. The terms “hooting”, “howling”, and “invaded” made the protestors seem barbaric.
NEXT CLASS MEETING
12 years ago
This paper uses the sources that were placed in the archive, because the author cited the newspaper that the information was taken from.This paper clearly states the social and economic status of this time.The paper does in fact discuss the idea of Planned Shrinkage. The paper does discuss the personal views of Roger Starr.There is effective transitions from one paragraph to the other represented in this paper.Yes every paragraph deals with one topic.
ReplyDelete1. Does the paper use sources from the archives and is the use of sources evident? yes the paper uses sources.
ReplyDelete2. Does the paper discuss the social and economic context of the time?
She mentions the city suffered socially and economically at the time.
3. Does the paper explore the idea of “planned shrinkage?” the paper states fact on thr planned shrinkage.
4. Does the paper discuss the reactions to the idea of “planned shrinkage?”
Despite their lack of money being at their disposal, they were treated differently and often categorized as living in the slums.
5. Does the paper discuss Starr’s personal philosophy? Yes it does…
6. Does the paper use the oral history report as evidence about Starr’s personal philosophy? Yes it does
7) 7. Does the paper connect Starr’s personal philosophy with the idea of “planned shrinkage?” Yes it does
8) 8. Does the paper offer the writer’s conclusion on how appropriate the idea of “planned shrinkage” was at the time? yes
9. Are there effective transitions between paragraphs? Yes
10. Does each paragraph deal only with one idea? Yes