For me to say who I agreed with I would just end up having to name everyone, because many of us had the same idea.  A lot of what we learned about immigration was heavily romanticized or “Disneyfied,” as Elizabeth said.  We take for granted (running hot and cold water, indoor toilets that actually work, and even something as simple as your own bed) what many immigrants only dreamed about having.  Reading Foner’s book made me really picture what immigrant life was like.  I could almost feel myself get claustrophobic at the thought of living in an illegally “sliced and diced” basement with several other immigrant families.  Sharing a bathroom with my family of five is hard enough sometimes and it’s almost impossible for me to picture sharing one (unreliable) bathroom with four or five other families.  These conditions were without a doubt horrible and unimaginable, and yet so many immigrants experienced this just to have a chance at living and maybe eventually prospering in New York.

As if reading about these living conditions wasn’t bad enough, finding out that people actually went on tours of the “Five Points” is revolting.   I could only think to myself did they only go to see how poverty looked and to feel relief and smugness that their life was so much better? One can only want to think better of people, but we all know that people like this existed and still do.  We would like the think that these rich people who slummed through these neighborhood would offer some sort of help, but as Toni Ann said about seeing a homeless person on the street, we don’t always give when we see blatant need in front of us.  So why are we so shocked the the rich people of this time period didn’t help either?

I agree with Liz when she stated that capitalism is not entirely to blame. I do believe that human selfishness and greed played a huge role in the overall poverty of the society but I think that other uncontrollable factors contributed to it as well. An overwhelming influx of people in such a short period of time will indubitably result in problems. Overcrowding will then in turn result in filthy tenement conditions and conflicts between people. Also at the same time, the government seemed to just ignore the problems. Without the help of the government, the people had no power to change their surroundings.

However, despite these conditions, I was also surprised to find out that people were kind to each other. Rebecca brings up the point that “The kindness of these poor people to each other is frequently astonishing but must be witnessed to be appreciated”. This, however, then contradicts the previous idea that people in Five Points were selfish and greedy. But as Rebecca mentioned, the town seemed to be very contradictive as a whole. I think this is characteristic of Five Points because it possesses a spectrum of different people, resulting in apparent differences and polar opposition.

As for the point about capitalism, I agree with Liz. If you compare the capitalist society we live in today to that of the past, we can see that it is very possible that a capitalist society can prosper. America today is one of the most wealthy nations. However, a economy can only prosper to its full potential if society as a whole pushes it forward.

Like William said, I felt extremely appreciative and grateful for everything I have while reading these chapters.  Some sort of plumbing system was a rare gift to the people living in these tenements described in the Five Points and Brownsville.  There is so much that I take for granted–that most of us take for granted–so naturally, these readings did not sit with me all too well.

What really made me happy though, was the fact that, as a few posts have mentioned, the poorest of the poor were still able to have a good time.  They still went to night clubs and mingled with one another, even if only brought together by the fact that they were in such similar, awful situations.  But isn’t that what draws us to one another?  People are naturally drawn to others who are like them, who can sympathize with them.  As appalling as it was to read of the tours the upper class people went on of Five Points, I’m sure that it was extremely hard for them to relate to the poor slum residents.  I do agree that they should have done something to help, but at the same time, I could point that finger right back at myself.  How often do I see a homeless person on the street, begging for a few dollars, and think to myself, “Wow, I feel sorry for them but it was partly their own fault…”?  It is hard to understand those who are so different than us, as I’m sure it was for the upper class when they went “slumming”.

Now this by no means gave the more fortunate an excuse to disregard the poor, because they were clearly living in horrid, inhumane conditions, but it does give me a tiny bit more understanding of the middle-upper class mentality.

As for the socialism vs. capitalism issue, I agree with Liz.

Since we’re having a little capitalist vs. communism debate here, I’d like to say that I agree with Elizabeth–that neither system is perfect.  It’s true that if the United States had been a Communist society, Five Points would not be in such a bad state, possibly because it would be non-existent.  Because, if you think about it, the degeneration of Five Points was, in part, caused by the huge number of immigrants that gathered there in a relatively short amount of time.  And why did these immigrants gather there?  They were there to improve their lives.  In a uniform society, like the one that Communism creates, there is no chance of advancement, hence no reason for immigrants to gather.  On the other hand, the capitalist system has a lot to do with the deterioration of Five Points.  Sigh.  This debate could continue for the rest of eternity and we’d still have no answer.

I totally agree with Elizabeth on how hard-hearted people must be to prefer to go slumming rather than help the people out and also with Rebecca on how Five Points was a profitable.  I may or may not have checked out the last chapter “The End of Five Points” in which it talks about the renovation of Five Points, mentioning a newspaper that stated that Five Points grew amazingly boring after it became a place actually worth living in.  I also remembered that scene in Slum dog Millionaire in which Jamal (was that his name?) was pointing out the buffaloes to the amazed tourists.

Praveena mentioned how it irked her how everyone was able to use Five Points to justify their personal beliefs.  I found it kind of funny.  But then I have a bizarre sense of humor.  But honestly, that’s the beauty of a symbol.  It can be used to represent almost anything.  Five Points is a symbol of all that is New York, whether it be anti-slavery or evils of capitalism.

About what Liz said–all humans being naturally greedy–that’s a little harsh, don’t you think?  There are all sorts of sides and facets to human nature–to generalize humanity is an injustice.

I remember thinking about Oliver Twist while reading, and I was pleasantly surprised when Charles Dickens was mentioned.  Though I’m not a fan of Oliver Twist, I liked all his other novels.  I thought it was kind of funny how Dickens exaggerated the conditions of Five Points to get his little revenge on the United States.  It just goes to show that Five Points can really be used to for anything.

So, I’m sitting here watching the Oscars, and I think to myself, “Gee, the richer always seem to get richer as the poorer get poorer, huh?” Seeing Anne Hathaway and James Franco all dolled up severely conflicted with the images of rags limply hanging off emaciated bodies I had lingering in my imagination after reading. But anyway –

I agree with Liz about Foner’s point about romanticization. It is extremely difficult to determine the validity of historic accounts when fact and opinionated-select memories intertwine. We experience this ourselves; when retelling a story that had emotional significance to us, how many times do we stretch fact and exaggerate the truth? This warping can be done to positive and negative memories alike; hence, the romanticization of Old World neighborhoods and the ignorance of Five Point’s benefits happen.

Anbinder’s descriptions were extremely vivid and grotesque. The explanations of freezing winters, sweltering summers, nauseating odors, poor sanitation, wimpy shelters, rampant diseases, overcrowded residential spaces, high rents, and unrelenting noises are incredible… in a bad way. That being said, I enjoyed reading his excerpts more than those of Foner and Pritchett. I guess my morbid curiosity would be naturally attracted to the idea of “slumming.” While reading that specific passage, I thought immediately of reality television, like Rebecca. It’s true – humans are naturally curious when it comes to the misfortunes of others, because it makes us realize, “it could’ve happened to us!”

Lydia Maria Child’s words from her work Letters from New York still resonate with me now: “Will the millennium ever come!” Well, it certainly did. And we have most deifnitely come a long way since the horrid conditions in the 19th-20th centuries; subways continue to make economic expansion possible, and toleration for those of foreign lands continues to grow as colors further mix together. Pritchett stated that “Brownsville’s second-generation did better than their parents, but only by a little” (32). Although this may be true, I think that even the slightest improvements meant the world to New York residents then. It proved that development was possible, and success would eventually come.

Oh goodness, the sparks both react so strongly to the conditions of the tenement life depicted in Anbinder, that I have actually forgotten what strong feelings I was gonna post about. Honestly though, I feel horrible for not having that strong of a reaction to the conditions that Five Pointers faced. I took notes about what I reacted to after reading, and I probably put a sentence or two on the page in relation to the conditions. Perhaps it’s because I’ve read about it so many times in so many other books depicting this location and era that it doesn’t have an effect on me anymore. Perhaps I’m just that heartless. Perhaps it’s some spectacular third reason.

As bad as their conditions were though, I disagree with Rebecca’s statement that these sort of conditions make socialism seem like the better option. With socialism, everyone gets the same pay, same amount of property. The incentive to work harder, the motivation to strive to do something creative or even beneficial to the community, is suppressed. With capitalism, the opportunity to use your brain and get ahead of others, it’s there. As Liz said, people are greedy anyway. Survival of the fittest, humans are always going to want to climb to the top and dominate the pyramid, no matter what economic system you use. I think capitalism embraces this undeniable aspect of human nature, instead of inhumanely suppressing it through socialism. [Despite how anti-socialism that may sound, I’m not THAT much against it… I’ve considered it over capitalism in the past too]

Oh no, now I’ve REALLY forgotten what I wanted to talk about. Hmm…

Is it wrong that what irked me was not the conditions in which these people lived, but rather the process that certain areas of NY had to undergo? I was particularly torn apart when reading about the Collect in Anbinder. In fact, I was distraught about Queens as well in Foner. They both seemed to depict serene, naturally beautiful areas that would have made Laura Ingalls Wilder squeal with joy. Then the city has to expand, or the slaughterhouses have to relocate due to being banned from inhabited areas. Goodbye nature, and hello congested city life. I can’t believe that something as “verdant and bucolic” as the Collect Pond area became the notorious slum that was Five Points. But I love observing nature, so that’s just me.

Speaking of observing, as “slumming” was described in greater detail in Anbinder, I couldn’t help but feel a little annoyed. The term “self-fulfilling prophecy” came to mind. It was like viewing wild animals on display. I felt that if I lived in Five Points and saw people being escorted around to “observe” us, I would feel like I was some sort of animal. I would probably eventually truly believe that I was some substandard form of man, and this would hinder my psychological and mental growth. While slumming may benefit those unaware of poverty or looking to write exposes, I still feel like it would create a culture of poverty, a group of people who would feel that they were destined to be filthy and poor, and would never be able to rise above that (I don’t know if “culture of poverty,” refers directly to what I just described though). Being on display like that, I felt like it made the Five Pointers feel trapped within their low status, and doomed to stay there.

Something that also irked me was how Five Points was being “used.” Anti-abolitionists used  FP as a means to say that slaves weren’t that bad off; Republicans used the Democratic orientation that FP had as a means to put down the Democratic Party. It made me feel like “Not only are these people poor and filthy, but they’re being used for other group’s corrupted agendas?”

Foner’s book is always full of facts and statistics, and I find that you’re either interested in the statistics, or you’re not. Certain figures managed to grab my attention. One of the facts that interested me from her chapter was the lack of Asian discrimination and their ability to move more easily into middle-class suburban areas. I was also amazed at some of the finer distinctions that she managed to pinpoint among ethnic groups. As someone who is Guyanese, I was amazed to see that she took a brief moment to state how interesting it was that Guyanese Indians and Guyanese Blacks tend to live apart in different areas, despite being from the same country. I didn’t think the distinction could have been made (I know of the clash between the two groups in Guyana, but I wasn’t aware that it was evident based on how Guyanese immigrants settle in the city).

I actually was intrigued by the transition from Five Points to Brownsville as I read the books. Anbinder mentions the area a few times in his chapters, and then I opened a book that described its history in great detail. Again, I was angered at how farmland was turned into a tenement display. But personally, as I read this, I felt like it was almost no different from the conditions described in FP, except this community had the Jewish feel. I actually felt like everything I read in this chapter had been said for Five Points (of course, there were political, social, and cultural differences).

Canal Street was mentioned often when describing the history of Five Points. Having been to Canal Street to attend a performance that was mandatory for my Arts Seminar, I was really intrigued. Canal street seemed so normal (I cant think of any other word besides that), and so I couldn’t believe what it once was. This actually sparked my interest and made me search up the history of where I grew up, which would be Jamaica, Queens. We are residing on top of crucial history, and we sometimes forget it.

I agree with the quote that Liz used from the Foner chapter; in many situations, the reality and the image that we see something in are completely different.  One main example that Foner talks about was the example of ethnic neighborhoods.  Foner mentions a great example of how some people perceived the tenement lifestyle of immigrants.  She talks about how the media has idealized what tenements were like for immigrants. Her example is of a Christmas special in which Mrs. Santa went to the Lower East Side in a ” well-furnished, clean, and rather spacious apartment” which goes against all reality of ethnic neighborhoods (Foner 36).  This is only one example of how the image and reality are different and how neighborhood horrors were romanticized by society.

Reading about the reality of immigrant neighborhoods allows me to be truly thankful for what I have today. The reading that especially struck me was Anbinder’s neighborhood description in the Five Points. There were so many horrors to take in at once as to how the immigrants were treated.  Being crowded in small rooms with families of sometimes more than four kids made these tenements immensely crowded.  To read that bathtubs and even beds were considered blessings and luxuries makes me realize how much I have.  Children sleeping in rags and even under tables as a daily routine was truly sad to read about.  To not even have working sewage lines and live in many people’s waste also angered me as well because landlords actually had immigrants pay for these conditions. Why would someone need to pay just to live in horrendous conditions that are beyond humane; one account in Anbinder talks about how a woman would search sixteen hours a day to find pieces of hair in garbage to sell to wigmakers so that she could pay her $5.00 rent.  She did this just so that she could live in a crowded tenement with rarely any heat or lighting. This was not an image but unfortunately the reality of tenement life.

I agree with what Rebecca said about how the rich detested helping the poor. However, seeing that the poor helped out each other with what little they had  amazed me. Despite their adversity, they tried to help each other out when society would not. It made me realize how evil the higher classes were during this time. They visited the neighborhoods not to help out the poor but only to watch how they lived; reading that does make you realize how evil human nature can be at times. I wondered why society would not help clean the neighborhoods or show some sort of help to show that they cared about them. Instead, rarely anything was done to help them, making this reality saddening to see and totally different from that Christmas special shown on TV.