In every great city throughout history, there has always been separation between those who are marginalized and down trodden and the upper echelons of society. This reached a climax in the first modern metropolis, New York City. At the turn of the twentieth century, the United States of America was in the process of emerging as an industrial and economic world power. The chance to come to the land of opportunity lead to a massive influx of immigrants, the majority of which were uneducated and poor, that swelled the population of many American cities, none more so than New York. Unprepared for such an increase in residents the tenement-housing model was heavily utilized in the city. Referred to as ‘the other half’ the poor, mainly blacks and
…show more content…
He wanted to show the members of the upper half just how bad the situation of the lower half, which propped them up, had become. The poor were crammed into tenements where disease and death were rampant. They rarely, if ever, saw any attempt by their landlord or employer to improve the conditions. Riis laid the blame for the tenants feeling neglected and forgotten on greed (62). Instead of blaming the poor for the conditions he believed they were a product of their environment and through proper investment in them, the poor can be brought out of poverty (237). However, the growing masses in the tenements were still becoming increasingly impoverished and Riis feared this growing disparity would lead to the poor rising up against their landlords and …show more content…
This fear was justifiable, one example of the discontent of the poor with the excess and comfort of the upper class was when a poor man pulled his knife on a busy New York street and began attacking a crowd of people in the upper and middle class in a blind rage (243). This fear of revolution was again presented by Riis in his closing section where he noted that as the suffering of the poor increases and their numbers swell it will reach a point from which there will be no turning back. Riis employed the analogy of a raging sea that swept everything in its path (266). All of this led him to believe that now was the time for action by the middle class to bridge the material gap and improve the living conditions of the
He wanted to show the members of the upper half just how bad the situation of the lower half, which propped them up, had become. The poor were crammed into tenements where disease and death were rampant. They rarely, if ever, saw any attempt by their landlord or employer to improve the conditions. Riis laid the blame for the tenants feeling neglected and forgotten on greed (62). Instead of blaming the poor for the conditions he believed they were a product of their environment and through proper investment in them, the poor can be brought out of poverty (237). However, the growing masses in the tenements were still becoming increasingly impoverished and Riis feared this growing disparity would lead to the poor rising up against their landlords and …show more content…
This fear was justifiable, one example of the discontent of the poor with the excess and comfort of the upper class was when a poor man pulled his knife on a busy New York street and began attacking a crowd of people in the upper and middle class in a blind rage (243). This fear of revolution was again presented by Riis in his closing section where he noted that as the suffering of the poor increases and their numbers swell it will reach a point from which there will be no turning back. Riis employed the analogy of a raging sea that swept everything in its path (266). All of this led him to believe that now was the time for action by the middle class to bridge the material gap and improve the living conditions of the