Jane Jacobs starts up her essay very strongly, stating that it is an attack, which I thought was an interesting way to attract readers. She does bring up a valid point later saying, we wish for more money to fix our problems, but why do we not take greater care to prevent them from even arising? Why is this short-sidedness always in our way? It seems to be an issue in a lot of things, not only urban-planning. As I read along I found that there were a lot of criticisms in the passage, but not an offered alternative or a new idea. Frankly, I got a little bored.
Jacobs says slums are a result of poor city planning, like that of the neighborhood Five Points. It was in fact poorly planned, as the beginning of chapter one briefs over, but I do not think that it was the planning that was the reason. The 1800’s were a very turbulent time in terms of social acceptance. The abolition movement was taking a toll on people and the momentum that erupted into the Civil War was beginning. Also, people were not all that accepting of immigrants, a trend that has occurred throughout United States history. To answer Liz’s question, it is very likely that it was the prejudice that kept immigrants on a lower social status which in turn affected their economic status, which is reflected in their neighborhood. Also, a point that I thought was a little outrageous, having people come tour how awful a place is does not fix anything; it would more likely ignite more conflict.
