When reading chapters six and seven of reconstructing time’s square, we analyzed the subtle changes in New York that gradually occurred in the second half of the twentieth century, and the effects of these changes. The changes began around the time of the housing act of 1949, which set up an urban renewal plan to “remake” cities, while protecting historical landmarks. While advocates of this pan claimed that this would “clean up” Manhattan for the sake of tourism bringing in revenue and making Times Square “safe”, citizens did not see this as the case. A lot of citizens saw this as urban renewal plan as “Negro Removal” in the 1960s, meaning the city was essentially forcing lower income African Americans out of their neighborhoods in midtown Manhattan, for the sake of turning a profit for property owners in times square. This was seen as a controversial take when the urban renewal and “clean up” was in effect, because it left poor minority citizens who once lived in Manhattan without homes, despite the economic growth that businesses saw after the gentrification had occurred. Personally, I think the citizens that were against this project were absolutely right. While Manhattan might’ve seen growth after the project, lower income families were essentially forced out of their neighborhoods, and the crime that comes with low income neighborhoods didn’t necessarily just disappear. Boroughs such as the Bronx and Brooklyn saw increases in crime. I think this speaks as a lesson to other cities. Gentrification doesn’t clean up crime, or “help” the residents living there originally. No businesses with jobs to offer the original residents were brought in. Gentrification just pushes the crime that comes with lower income neighborhoods elsewhere, for the sake of the property owners, and to the dismay of the original residents, who are forced out of their own neighborhoods. 

When asked the question if I’d take a job away from my family to help support them, I thought that this was a complicated question. As an American who didn’t grow up in poverty, I’d be devastated to have to leave my family to support them. But, I recognize that this is not the case not only for some Americans, but several people around the world. A lot of countries around the world don’t have the resources to dedicate to workforce employment. As a result, some people will have to move to places, foreign or within the country, for financial reasons. The article we read about Ecuadorian citizens having to find work in America or elsewhere to support their family in their home country is a prime example of this. Ecuador has an entrenched class system that stymies those in poverty from escaping poverty. They value patriarchal lineage, and heavily are concerned with who you know. This is the only way you can find work, which results in an endless cycle of poverty for those without any financial connections. So what some fathers do to support their families is they migrate to countries such as America to find work to support their families financially. This is why American cities are highly populated, because people are looking for work, which results in urbanization, ultimately. If I was an immigrant faced with the difficult circumstances of not being able to find work to support my family because of a flawed system, I would definitely move away to support them financially.I of course would prefer to work locally in my home country, but such circumstances are unrealistic for several people from foreign nations.

When reading chapters 17 and 18, the authors portrayed the cities of New York and Paris as major international cities, which they are. Both of these cities have an international presence regarding the citizens, business, and culture. A big common ground between New York and Paris that Brettel and Kemper discuss in chapter 18 is the cities being gateway cities, which lead these cities to become multicultural metropolises over time. These cities become gateways that people from foreign nations tend to immigrate to over time. 

When asked the question, would I want to live in an international city like Paris or like New York, I’d need to know the circumstances. When it comes to New York, I’d absolutely live in New York city. I grew up near New York City and have been there countless times, so it wouldn’t be foreign to me. I also enjoy the concept of living in an American city like New York, because of how close everything together is, the variety of people, and of course the history aspect. All of this applies to Paris as well, but as a result of living in New Jersey my whole life, I think I’d have a better experience living in New York. If I was doing anthropology work in Paris, or was visiting with friends, that would definitely be something I’d be interested in. I’d enjoy doing anthropology work there nonspecific because of the diverse population, and I’d learn about several foreign cultures. 

In conclusion, I’d definitely enjoy living in a major international city. Living there you’d be introduced to several different cultures and all types of people.

After I read chapter thirteen and fourteen, I thought both these articles presented a clear correlation between poverty and crime, and how crime is an effective method (in the short term) to make ends meet for those with minimal means of income. Goode analyzes society’s false reasoning for poverty, and does a great job at explaining the cycle of poverty and how difficult it is for those living in poverty to move up from their socioeconomic classes. She discusses those living in poverty are faced with systemic oppression through a limited labor market, and mentions William Wilson, who explained the main root of poverty is structured economic change, such as less factories. Goode refutes explanations made by people such as Ronald Reagen and Moynihan, who both claim that poverty is a “cultural mindset”, which is basically calling those in poverty lazy, blaming them for being part of a “dependatory culture”. This is of course not the truth to why poverty exists, as Goode points out. She explains that poverty is a result of people being excluded from the urban labor market by structural economic change. As a result of those in poverty struggling financially, people’s choices to make ends meet are limited, which may lead people to make ends meet through crime. Bourgois makes similar points regarding what leads to people living in poverty turning to crime. He discusses how as the public sector declines, less people can find work, and these people tend to turn to crime to make ends meet, and the underground drug economy grows as a result. 

As I read this article, I saw several similarities between the description of Yarmouk of Demascus and several major cities of the United States. While there were definitely less similarities regarding Chinese cities and American cities, I saw a lot of qualities that Yarmouk had in common. For one thing, Yarmouk does have poverty and crime among the citizens that live there.The camp Yarmouk is a Palestinian refugee camp located in Syria, and the camp has a substantial amount of poverty considering the harsh conditions that the refugees have faced. Major cities in America also struggle with poverty. Something I saw in particular that resonated with America was how outsiders view the camps. Syrians who don’t live in Yarmouk fear the camp because of crime and poverty, and obviously their unfamiliarity with Palestinians. While Yarmouk still has some crime, it definitely isn’t dangerous enough to not be able to live in and go about your everyday life. I thought this connected with how outsiders in America view cities and the people who live in them. People who are unfamiliar with American cities tend to perceive them as dangerous and impoverished, when in reality, plenty of people go about their lives in cities with little to no trouble in most cases. Although income may be lower and crime rates may be higher in cities, American cities are home to hundreds of thousands of people who lead peaceful lives. Something that the Demascus camps and American cities have in common are the negative stereotypes of Palestinian refugees and African American citizens of cities, respectively. Nell Gabiam discusses how some Syrian informants told her that Palestinians who live in refugee camps are violent and pugnacious, when this is nothing but a negative stereotype. The same applies to how certain Americans with racial prejudices view African Americans who live in cities. They perceive African Americans as violent and pugnacious based off racial stereotypes, just like how the Syrians view Palestinian refugees.

If given the option to do fieldwork in Hobart or Milan, I’d definitely be more inclined to do fieldwork in Milan. Though I am sure I’d enjoy doing fieldwork in Hobart for a litany of reasons, primarily being it’s a great opportunity to learn about different people and cultures, I think I’d enjoy experiencing life in Milan because of the much bigger population. Milan has over a million people while Hobart has just over two hundred thousand people. I think I’d be introduced to more people and a bigger variety of cultures as a result of a larger population. 

While I would rather do fieldwork in Milan as a result of a larger population, both of these cities are known for their unique architecture, design, and landscapes. Milan has several culturally significant establishments, such as the Gothic Duomo di Milano and the Santa Maria delle Grazie convent, which is home to Leonardo da Vinci’s mural, “The Last Supper”. Of course this wouldn’t have any relevance to the anthropology fieldwork, but I would definitely enjoy seeing what it’s like in Milan. 

While Milan is known for the artistically historical architecture, Hobart is known for unique architecture and design as well. Hobart is known for the scenic views and the beautiful landscape, and also rests on the river Derwent, and has a well preserved colonial architecture.  

While both Milan and Hobart are both aesthetically pleasing cities, it is irrelevant to the fieldwork. Both cities have their pros and cons to do fieldwork in. Milan has a much larger population, which gives you more opportunities to meet different types of people. However, a largely populated city is also hard to gain informants in because of the fast paced lifestyle. Hobart would be easier to gain informants in because it’s a more rural and less populated town. However, I’d want to do fieldwork in Milan more because of the large population and the various types of people you meet in a larger city.

Like most people who live in the northeast, the biggest city I’ve been to before is of course New York City. New York is over double the size of Los Angeles’ population, and it shows in both the structure and the density of people you’ll see on an average day in New York. New York City is divided into five boroughs; Queens, Brooklyn, Bronx, Manhattan, and Staten Island. While all these boroughs vary in population and landscapes among other things, each borough has various different types of neighborhoods within themselves. The boroughs have both suburban neighborhoods and urban neighborhoods, and even somewhat rural neighborhoods in Staten Island. As a result of the varying types of neighborhoods in New York City, it’s difficult to summarize the entire city. Although there are several different parts of the city, when I went, I thought it was predominantly urban. Crowded with skyscraper esque buildings and thousands of different people from all different backgrounds and cultures, New York City is somewhat of a microcosm of the melting pot that the United States is. I grew up in a town in North Jersey called Wayne. Although Wayne is only around twenty minutes from Manhattan, Wayne is a predominantly white town. In New York City, the population is far more diverse. I saw people of all ethnicities, which is often the case is populous cities such as New York.

Of course what separated New York from Wayne was the amount of people I saw along the way. The sidewalks were filled with thousands of people, most of which were on their way somewhere, whether it was work, or to attend to some sort of event. Besides the people lounging with friends on stoops or leisurely walking around with friends, the people in New York all seem to be in a hurry to get somewhere. This makes sense because of all the businesses in New York. There were plenty of billboards, bright lights, and big advertisements, which are also common in cities, but New York had more than any other city I’ve been to.

This is an example post, originally published as part of Blogging University. Enroll in one of our ten programs, and start your blog right.

You’re going to publish a post today. Don’t worry about how your blog looks. Don’t worry if you haven’t given it a name yet, or you’re feeling overwhelmed. Just click the “New Post” button, and tell us why you’re here.

Why do this?

• Because it gives new readers context. What are you about? Why should they read your blog?
• Because it will help you focus you own ideas about your blog and what you’d like to do with it.

The post can be short or long, a personal intro to your life or a bloggy mission statement, a manifesto for the future or a simple outline of your the types of things you hope to publish.

To help you get started, here are a few questions:

• Why are you blogging publicly, rather than keeping a personal journal?
• What topics do you think you’ll write about?
• Who would you love to connect with via your blog?
• If you blog successfully throughout the next year, what would you hope to have accomplished?

You’re not locked into any of this; one of the wonderful things about blogs is how they constantly evolve as we learn, grow, and interact with one another — but it’s good to know where and why you started, and articulating your goals may just give you a few other post ideas.

Can’t think how to get started? Just write the first thing that pops into your head. Anne Lamott, author of a book on writing we love, says that you need to give yourself permission to write a “crappy first draft”. Anne makes a great point — just start writing, and worry about editing it later.

When you’re ready to publish, give your post three to five tags that describe your blog’s focus — writing, photography, fiction, parenting, food, cars, movies, sports, whatever. These tags will help others who care about your topics find you in the Reader. Make sure one of the tags is “zerotohero,” so other new bloggers can find you, too.