I'd say most of us see "the other half" as the rich, because we see ourselves as poor, relatively speaking [0]. I think Riis titled his book to give the rich an idea how bad things were for others, to try and draw some empathy from them.
0 - of course, wealth distribution isn't 50/50 today (and probably never was)
If you live in NYC, you might be underwhelmed. I toured a couple years ago, and my main reaction was "This looks like a bigger version of my current apartment!" A huge percentage of the walk-up buildings in Manhattan are from the tenement era, so it's pretty likely that you or a friend already live in one.
I live in NYC with my wife and two kids in a 1 bedroom unit in a prewar building. I've never been to the Tenement Museum and it sounds like I don't need to.
That was the most interesting part to learn about for me, but they don't have the outhouses, and many of the tours are in units that were retrofitted with indoor plumbing and bathrooms later. Those units look essentially the same as they do now, except they have older furniture and kitchen fittings.
Fantastic to see this, and great timing as I just finished reading "The Rise of Theodore Roosevelt".
Roosevelt befriended Riis and the journalist had a large influence on him and his policies. As Riis confidence in Roosevelt's political perspectives grew, he also helped promote TR through his journalistic work.
I would recommend the book greatly for anyone interested in the politics of this era, or just Roosevelt himself.
Very interesting. But one of the problem is immigration. With open door policy that make USA great at the same time make the problem hard. But as long as it is hard to get there, the problem is not totally unsolved. Some sort of "control" is needed but not totally cut. That would be a universal problem as there would be rich-poor region forever. As said you can send people to the moon but never solve the problem of the poor. Not solved but should be handled. Could be handled. And even if not, we can try. But not unlimited immigration.
And US immigration law for the past century and a half has been largely about ethnic exclusion, such as the "No More Chinamen Act" of 1882 and the "We Have Quite Enough Kikes and Wops Now Thanks" Act of 1924.
As a legal immigrant, I can assure you, it's not open door. It's difficult, expensive, long and Kafkaesque. You really really shouldn't describe an experience you clearly don't understand.
Could you imagine life prior to widely available HVAC? These cramped streets, heaving with people and heat. It's all the more remarkable given the sartorial expectation of the time. How did people wear suits and dense dresses regularly?
The older I get the more of a connection I feel with historical images/video/audio. Viewing life on this planet without the constraint of time feels as profound as contemplating the depths of space. It's just out of my reach, but I keep reaching for it because that is where the answers are. Some things seem to be in a constant state of change while others remain in a constant cycle.
from a photography standpoint, Jacob Riis is one of the most interesting characters in the field. He committed one of the cardinal sins of photojournalism: many of his photographs were lies, with staged subjects. He spent effort to make the conditions look worse than they were- for his own gain, and also likely because he really believed in showing the conditions of urban life.
many outside of photography will overlook fussy criticism of Riis- his work helped pass laws that positively affected the lives of millions, who cares if he directed street urchins where to sit and made situations seem more desperate than they actually were? after all, the conditions were often extremely desperate.
but his job as a photojournalist was to portray things as they were- especially since he portrayed his photos as journalism. arguably, his photos also flattened the immigrant experiance to poor, crime ridden, and full of disease, rather than poor, crime ridden, full of disease, full of opportunity, and often with a great sense of community that made up immigrant life at that time. He also directly profited from simplifying and lying about urban life.
to me, Jacob Riis symbolizes how positive change isn't always done by the most scrupulous of actors, and the complicated relationship of truth and nuance with social change and politics. in order to pass a law, society often needs to have an uncompromisingly negative opinion of whatever status quo will be overthrown.
And if you condone doing this, because you agree with the cause, what will you say when someone does this kind of deception to promote a cause you vehemently disagree with?
because of the impact of his work- I don't know if I could condemn him- sanitation and child labor laws are huge. but we can't justify his methods, or justify people like him in a modern context. Jacob Riis was also arguably racist- what if it was his racism that got codified into the legal system instead of child labor laws and sanitation? then he'd be viewed as evil, without any philosophical nuance. We can only start the conversation about justifying his methods as worth it after knowing how it all turned out- we shouldn't assume any contemporaries can justify lying today.
so we're left with a profiteering liar, who had a larger positive impact on the world than I can likely hope to have, and that's what makes his case so fascinating.
It’s a hard question. Ultimately it’s a does the end justify the means type of question. I suppose if you agree with the result then yes maybe, if not then probably not.
I don’t know in this particular case how far the truth was stretched but we see this every day in for example advertisement and I think kind of expect it. I do wonder though if there is a version of the world where we can all present the objective truth, or as close to it as possible and have the “right” outcomes. I suspect not, since then you’ll be at a disadvantage to those who stretches the truth a little.
I wonder how his audiences back then perceived this issue.
The indoor pictures he made by just entering and firing a pistol with magnesium (later a frying pan).
The outdoor ones he had to stage to some extent because of the long exposure times. Of course he took advantage of this, and the immigrants also wanted to pose for the camera.
For anyone back then knowing anything about photography (which in his audience might have been quite a few) it should have been obvious that e.g. the photo of three boys stealing from a drunk man was staged, you could not make snapshots of quick actions.
How The Other Half Lives [0] really is a worthwhile read, if you're at all interested in the history of NYC or of social reforms, or just want a reminder to be grateful for your own modern middle-class living conditions. The poverty described can be deeply overwhelming.
It's also basically the American counterpart to Engels' classic The Condition of the WOrking Class in England [1].
42 comments
[ 3.5 ms ] story [ 62.3 ms ] threadI'd say most of us see "the other half" as the rich, because we see ourselves as poor, relatively speaking [0]. I think Riis titled his book to give the rich an idea how bad things were for others, to try and draw some empathy from them.
0 - of course, wealth distribution isn't 50/50 today (and probably never was)
https://www.tenement.org
https://www.tenement.org/visit/tenement-apartment-tours/
"The Conquest of Pestilence in New York City" http://eportfolios.macaulay.cuny.edu/tenementmuseum/files/20...
http://merchantshouse.org
This is what unions fought, not when the office mgr takes away the nespresso machine.
/2 cents
The museum did have pictures of water pollution.
Roosevelt befriended Riis and the journalist had a large influence on him and his policies. As Riis confidence in Roosevelt's political perspectives grew, he also helped promote TR through his journalistic work.
I would recommend the book greatly for anyone interested in the politics of this era, or just Roosevelt himself.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Rise_of_Theodore_Roosevelt
The USA doesn't have an open door policy.
But agree on the suit deal - How do they stand it? The Amish in Iowa today wear wool even in the hottest weather. Nuts to that.
When it's 50 degrees in September, people here in upstate NY put on gloves. When it's 50 degrees in April, they wear shorts.
many outside of photography will overlook fussy criticism of Riis- his work helped pass laws that positively affected the lives of millions, who cares if he directed street urchins where to sit and made situations seem more desperate than they actually were? after all, the conditions were often extremely desperate.
but his job as a photojournalist was to portray things as they were- especially since he portrayed his photos as journalism. arguably, his photos also flattened the immigrant experiance to poor, crime ridden, and full of disease, rather than poor, crime ridden, full of disease, full of opportunity, and often with a great sense of community that made up immigrant life at that time. He also directly profited from simplifying and lying about urban life.
to me, Jacob Riis symbolizes how positive change isn't always done by the most scrupulous of actors, and the complicated relationship of truth and nuance with social change and politics. in order to pass a law, society often needs to have an uncompromisingly negative opinion of whatever status quo will be overthrown.
https://research.steinhardt.nyu.edu/scmsAdmin/media/users/gr... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacob_Riis
because of the impact of his work- I don't know if I could condemn him- sanitation and child labor laws are huge. but we can't justify his methods, or justify people like him in a modern context. Jacob Riis was also arguably racist- what if it was his racism that got codified into the legal system instead of child labor laws and sanitation? then he'd be viewed as evil, without any philosophical nuance. We can only start the conversation about justifying his methods as worth it after knowing how it all turned out- we shouldn't assume any contemporaries can justify lying today.
so we're left with a profiteering liar, who had a larger positive impact on the world than I can likely hope to have, and that's what makes his case so fascinating.
I don’t know in this particular case how far the truth was stretched but we see this every day in for example advertisement and I think kind of expect it. I do wonder though if there is a version of the world where we can all present the objective truth, or as close to it as possible and have the “right” outcomes. I suspect not, since then you’ll be at a disadvantage to those who stretches the truth a little.
It's also basically the American counterpart to Engels' classic The Condition of the WOrking Class in England [1].
[0] https://www.gutenberg.org/files/45502/45502-h/45502-h.htm [1] http://www.gutenberg.org/files/17306/17306-h/17306-h.htm