I enjoyed this book very much; it practically screamed “New York” from the first few pages. What struck me the most, however, was the age of Holly. When she had first told the narrator she was only nineteen, I imagined a girl similar to my age- but that most definitely was not the case. Although she presented herself as a mature woman occasionally, her age did show. Throughout the story, little details and actions hint at the youth of Holly. For example, her constant memories of Fred, her childlike and carefree attitude, and her little fits. I think her innocence was taken away from her from the moment she entered New York City, and this is why she searched for older men to provide and care for her. She is essentially still a child; I cannot imagine living the life that she led, and I’m almost nineteen! She offered all the potential of a rising star, but was lost in bad decisions, although not necessarily by her actions but from not knowing any better. After the death of her parents, she constantly had to do for herself, so New York was the perfect setting for her to try to achieve her goals and escape her past. However, she was unable to leave her past behind and fleeing was her go-to escape.

Truman Capote’s Breakfast at Tiffany’s captured the flagrant, almost imprudent personality of a young woman who seeks nothing but self-advancement and fulfillment. The eye-candy appeal of Holly Golightly, which she feels is to her benefit, is actually the essence of the path to her downfall–her ultimate unhappiness. By recognizing that she can take advantage of her physical attributes, she abuses them so that she can seduce her way into a supposedly rich, extravagant lifestyle. Capote seems to mock her by repeatedly including characters that promise her a stable life, such as the narrator, Doc, and O.J. Berman. Golightly misses the chance for redemption for her foolish actions every time and instead is bent on a life of perpetual “change.” But the irony is that when change occurs–like the death of her brother, Fred–she is crushed and brought down again to confront her vulnerability. She cannot run away from being susceptible to emotions, no matter to which new city she relocates. But by the time she realizes this, her fate has been set.

When I read this book, I was reminded somewhat of the New Woman trend that permeated through the early 1900s. Although the plot of this book takes place much later during World War 2, it seems that the principles still remained, if not gotten much more strong. The New Woman embodied independence and a recognition of identity. In literature, she challenged patriarchal authority and customary manners. Holly Golightly seems to take these values to the extreme and never settles for less that what she wants. But in the end, this independent, egotistical way of thinking that appeared to promise freedom only enchained her to a pathetic way of living aimlessly.

After finishing this book, I thought back to LaGuardia’s overall persona and his actions throughout his personal and political career. It didn’t surprise me when Roosevelt offered the directorship of the COD to LaGuardia, however it did surprise me that he had permitted him to remain both as mayor and sit in on Cabinet meetings. Immediately after reading this, I was concerned that maybe this would be too much for the Little Flower to handle- it was. Also, I questioned the motives behind Roosevelt’s choosing Little Flower and the effect this would have on their complicated relationship. Nearing the end of LaGuardia’s political career, he loses control and it seems a slight ego gets the best of him, which is unfortunate. Although his mayoral terms in NYC and his overall political career had some flaws, he wasn’t well known for being simply ordinary, after all, an airport is named after him.

I found this book to be very interesting in the way that it tells the story of President FDR and NYC Mayor LaGuardia. It provides both biographical facts and political explanations of the events of the time period. Most interesting to me, however, was the difference in upbringing and how that shaped their ideals and future policies. For example, LaGuardia was the son of two immigrants and saw New York, although born there, with as much promise and potential as other immigrants. His optimism of what New York could become for him was evident in his persona. Later, amongst many other things, he strongly argues for higher wages and shorter hours amongst lower class immigrants. Similarly, FDR was brought into his prestigious family name with an upper-class raising. This upper-class idea included a preference to nature over busy city streets. Through the New Deal, changes were made that displayed FDR’s high regard for nature and parks. I believe that the upbringings of both politicians had shaped their policies and what they argue for or against.

Anzia Yezierska’s Bread Givers, gives the reader an amazingly detailed, powerful, and poignant story of a Jewish family living in 1920s New York, and their struggle to survive in the crowded, disease filled building. The novel, written in Sarah’s perspective, follows her journey as she turns her back on her Jewish culture, and it’s tradition of holding women inferior to men, to pursue her dreams, no matter the cost, and live at a higher standard than the one she experienced growing up. Her fictional journey to success is a paragon to the one all immigrants make – becoming the best they could be in a land of limitless opportunity. Sarah’s story is really powerful in showing the sacrifices she makes to become a teacher, and how she never lost sight of that final goal.