Write about a surprising or interesting thing that you learned from the segment of the New York documentary that you just watched that has not been mentioned in a previous response. Why did you find it striking?
20 thoughts on “Order and Disorder”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
A surprising and interesting concept that I learned from this segment of the documentary is that New York is entirely man-made. The documentary used several examples of New York’s history and development to emphasize how the city is as we know it only because of the gamble certain individuals took on it. For example, I learned that Alexander Hamilton was one of the first politicians to recognize New York City as having the potential to be a city who’s economy is a “capitalist democracy.” Alexander Hamilton envisioned a city where anyone, regardless of social class or ethnicity, can come to and become successful by using its resources. To me, this was striking because if Alexander Hamilton was not as passionate about his goal for New York, it would not have been the metropolitan superpower that it is today. Instead it would be the capitol of the United States of America, resembling what Washington D.C. looks like. Alexander Hamilton had a vision and he protected it. Unknowingly, he set the stage for future men who share his values to make this city what it is today. After living in New York for 12 years, I simply cannot imagine this city without its exuberance. This made me appreciative of New York’s history, and thankful that I live in the greatest city in the world.
An interesting fact I learned from this documentary was that P.T. Barnum had opened an exhibit known as the American Museum in lower Manhattan. Prior to watching this documentary, I knew some basic information about Barnum. I was aware that through his infamous scams and his vast collection of curiosities, Barnum built a successful business. However, I never knew that part of his business flourished in New York City. Barnum’s American Museum included a wide range of exhibits designed to appeal to New York’s increasingly diverse population. For example, he had a model of Dublin built to attract Irish immigrants and a moral lecture room for the middle class. I had never known about these exhibits, but I can certainly understand their success. These exhibits were designed to bring comfort to those who had recently arrived and to appease the middle class, who had become concerned about a loss of morality due to New York’s rapid surge in population. In addition, he displayed many human curiosities. Beforehand, I knew about the bearded girl, General Tom Thumb, and the conjoined twins. However, I had not known about the man with microcephaly he presented and the negative racial implications of this exhibit. The fascinating anatomical anomalies of these individuals captivated millions of visitors. The crowds that flocked to this museum were of all different backgrounds, yet they were united by their curiosity. The fact that this particular museum was able to bring together so many diverse individuals certainly says something about human nature: we are all naturally curious and we have a deep desire to investigate the things that seem strange or unusual to us. Over the course of twenty-seven years, that curiosity helped Barnum’s museum sell more tickets than there were people in the United States. Overall, this newfound information is striking because it is something I never knew about the very district I live in. Additionally, Barnum’s museum and business techniques are striking due to their greater social implications regarding race, diversity, normalcy, and human nature.
My last post was actually a response to the first part of the documentary. For this assignment’s purpose, please disregard my last post and use this one instead.
An interesting fact I learned from this segment of the documentary was that modern day journalism has its origins in New York City. According to the documentary, up until the 1830s, it was considered a luxury to read the newspaper. Newspapers were pricey, and because of that there were a limited number of them available. Also, newspapers were owned by one political party, which leads me to assume that the information they contained was quite biased. James Gordon Bennett founded the New York Herald. It being available for just a penny and the fact that it was independently owned were major factors contributing to the Herald’s success and popularity; however, the one major change that captivated readers from all over the city is one that continues to thrive. The New York Herald published stories relating strongly to what people wanted to know as oppose to what they should know. The nature of these stories included gangs, drugs, sex, and crime. This was striking because, although I am able to recognize this pattern in today’s media outlets, I did not know that its roots trace so far back and that they originated in this city. One of my favorite movies, Anchorman, satirizes the notion that people are only interested in obscene news coverage. This segment of the documentary proved the same, but from a historical perspective.
I wanted to claim this topic before anyone could, hence me writing this assignment relatively early. Anyway, what I found interesting and quite captivating was the ending homage to Whitman. The analysis of what Walt Whitman stood for, his implications, and striking contrast with his contemporaries really hit home for me. Being the son of immigrants, I’ve had my share of bullying because of it and it is refreshing to see someone be able to recognize the wrong in their society and have the courage to stand up to it in such an upstanding fashion.
Whitman celebrated the immigrants, he celebrated the long masts of ships, he celebrated the sparking Hudson because like the Hudson, immigrants made New York, New York. They gave it culture; they gave it taxes; they gave it hands to work. Today, these ideas are seldom held but just think how rare these ideas must have been in the 19th century. I had thought that nobody held these views but I was wrong. Whitman is the great outlier.
Speaking about modern times, Whitman would be appalled about how little things have changed today. Whitman wanted America to follow in New York’s footsteps and become a diverse place but now with Trump fanning the flames of nationalistic fervor, calling for deportation of Mexicans, barring Muslim entry to America, and erecting a wall on the Mexican border, it appears we have made no progress. Americans would do well to remember the words of Whitman. There is no such thing as making “American great again.” If that means bleaching America of all its diversity and people, then it isn’t America anymore. Allowing immigrants into America does not dilute our country but rather strengthens it.
One segment in the documentary I found shocking was the immigration of Irish immigrants starting in 1845. I was taken back by the sheer number of immigrants, 1.5 million of those who came to the United States. I found that number impossible to visualize or even rap my mind around. Of those 1.5 million, one million immigrants came across South Street. In reality even more tried to make the perilous journey, but had died on the infamous “coffin ships.”
After beating the odds and surviving the trip, immigrants were met with racist cartoons, miserable rodent infested living conditions, rampant disease and heated competition for jobs. This scene was likely not what they had envisioned the United States to be. I found it quite puzzling that Irish people, who were white English speaking Christians, would be victim to racism at all. To me, it seems as if the Irish were very similar to the “original” American leaders and the reason for the hate and fear perhaps was unrelated to their catholic faith and completely economic. I was also astonished by the brutality with which factory owners utilized Irish and Black worker competition, successfully pinning the two groups against each other to pay lower wages and break strikes. Moreover, in his novel, The Dangerous Classes of New York, Charles Loring Brace argues that the Irish need to be helped because they will grow up and have the power to vote. Charles Brace is often regarded as the father of the modern foster care movement, however I find that his reasoning was motivated more by fear and desire to change the Irish children’s religious views than genuine philanthropy. Overall, this picture of racism is a far cry from the diverse open mined picture of New York that is often idealistically depicted.
Something from this video that I found interesting was that there is no specific book or novel that depicted New York. Pete Hamill states that there were no books that show the life of this city. A book is not enough to capture the daily lives of New Yorkers. A newspaper, however, can add that element of surprise and the routines of people. Everyday there was something going on, people’s daily lives and activities. Newspapers gave New York City a certain dynamic. So much was going on in New York. Every street had their own story for the people to be ready for.
Before 1830s, newspapers had very little circulation and popularity. James Gordon Bennet revolutionized the idea of a newspaper by starting The New York Herald. The Herald was inexpensive and politically independent. In a populated and busy place, like New York, there was and is always so much to write about and share. I found it hard to believe that newspapers were expensive and uncommon. I do agree that newspapers could have political bias, but it was hard to imagine a big city like New York with limited papers.
Something that interested me in the video was the emphasis on how the Erie Canal affected the development of New York City. It amazes me how something that is relatively far from the actual city of New York is one of the quintessential reasons why New York City became the economic juggernaut that it is. I wonder if the authorities who pushed for the development of the canal understood the importance of what they were building. The canal lead to the development of “ten miles of street front per year during the 1830s, 40s, and 50s,” according to the video. The effect of the canal is not the only thing about it that surprises me. The development of it is another spectacle. From what I remember about the Erie canal from the documentary we watched in class, there was nothing like it around the time. Furthermore, many people believed that it would bankrupt the government, yet the expenses of building the canal were all compensated before the canal was even finished building. This was due to opening sections of the canal that had been developed. I had never realized the importance of the canal before watching the documentary.
Something that interested and surprised me after watching this segment of the documentary, was the way in which immigrants, specifically Irish immigrants, were treated as they made their way to the United States in hope of a better life. All of the immigrants came with the same purpose as the original colonists, but those who now inhabited the land saw themselves as better than the Irish and therefore more entitled. The Irish were given demeaning jobs and forced to work for minimal compensation, and they were expected to be grateful for such work because it fed their family. The whole principal contradicted what every colonist came to the United States for – freedom and prosperity. The immigrants came to the New World expecting to find the greatest country in the world as described, but rather found themselves living in conditions that were unfit for anyone.
This issue is one that has yet to fade away in American society. The United States is considered a melting pot of different ethnicities and backgrounds and claims to give the same rights and freedoms to every single individual, but yet immigrants continue to face discrimination. Illegal Mexicans are considered harmful to American society by many and are placed into demeaning jobs, but in reality they play an active role in the functioning of our country, just as any other citizen. Syrian refugees who are now trying to seek refuge in the U.S. are often turned away and seen as dangerous, when legitimate citizens in our country have proven a greater danger to our society. Modern day immigrants come with the same intentions as immigrants in the early stages of American society, but are met with the same discrimination as the Irish were. After seeing this documentary, I realized that the hostility to immigrants which we often see now, arose long before modern day issues but has grown and is now becoming a more serious problem.
I was shocked to learn about the violent riots that took place in the early part of New York City history and the way the City was able to overcome such adversity. With fights breaking out between social classes, immigrants, races, and religions, New York City was in a state of chaos. It seems the only similarity between groups was when both had a common enemy!
On a day known as “The Bloody Sixth”, six men were killed as protestant and catholic gangs clashed for control of the streets. With such danger lurking on every street corner, it is truly appalling that people would stay in the City. The nonexistence of people fleeing the City speaks volumes about its inhabitants. People must have believed in the opportunities New York City possessed. The attractiveness of jobs was obviously enough to outweigh the negative consequences of gang violence showing people’s capitalistic and grit qualities.
Additionally to street violence, the city mayor was a center for problems. Newly elected Fernando Wood was voted into office with most of his votes coming from poor immigrants. Republicans had the state legislatures limit the mayor’s power. All these distractions in city hall allowed for gang violence to continue. In light of poor circumstances, Walt Whitman published Leaves of Grass. His successful novel was surprisingly optimistic even though he lived in such turbulent times. Whitman really encompasses the attitude of New Yorker’s by showing dedication to New York City through thick and thin.
Today, I am still surprised to see the same New York qualities hundreds of years ago present. I’ve learned New Yorkers have always been determined and enduring. Whether through the riots of the past or the terrorist attacks of the present, New York has shown an ability to fight through challenges.
I found the development of Printing House Road to be quite an accomplishment for so the 1840s. The development of so many newspapers is something that living in modern day New York one can take for granted. We have options like the New York Times, Daily New, The Post, and even though these vary in the issues they cover and the people they cater to, each of these has found an audience which allows them to thrive. While the New York Post and Daily News report in a similar fashion has the Herald, the New York Times will tell you what you “ought to know” as one historian in the documentary put it.
This kind of variety doesn’t exist across the entirety of the United States. In some parts of the country each major city may only have one newspaper and as a result the publishers of said newspapers have much control over the views of the people. Although access to news through other outlets such as the internet and television has mitigated this power, for a long time it went unchecked. New York City was way ahead of its time with the creation of competitive and affordable newspapers.
One thing I found interesting from the documentary was the reality the immigrant infants and children of New York. With the highest death rate in the city and often left abandoned or orphaned, these children faced their own conflicts like the Irish or black faced with discrimination. As Charles Loring Brace founded the Children’s Aid Society, these children were given a new way of life that they have never experienced before for only seventeen cents a night. Brace wrote a book titled “The Dangerous Classes of New York” mentioning how these children living in their terrible conditions would rise up to fit that title. I found it ironic how these children would grow up to become a powerful voice in the political world when they are able to vote. They will vote for themselves and vote for a society they want in contrast of what they had to suffer in their childhood. I enjoyed how Brace understood that the future of our society lies within our children and certain measures should be taken to prioritize them despite the current situations society is facing. His founding of the Children’s Aid Society paved a way for children to be given an opportunity for a future they can create for themselves and lives to that mission statement till this day. It’s hard to argue that despite the harsh realities of the 1850s with immigration tensions and internal civil conflicts, Brace secured the future by instilling hope into the neglected children for a brighter future for New York.
I found it very interesting that in such a small area, there were so many contrasting groups present at one time. Within every couple of blocks, there was a different economic and social status. City Hall being the center of government, Wall Street being the center of commerce, and then many slums, were all in close proximity to each other. It amazes me that within a condensed area of only a few miles, there was huge gaps of wealth and poverty, different racial and ethnic backgrounds, and high/low culture.
I also was very surprised of how newspapers were expensive and were owned by different political parties, all influencing their views on their readers. With James Gordon Bennett, the reader finally got to pick and choose what they ought to read. What I found really interesting was that people relied on the newspaper to get a sense of order in the city of chaos. They needed the daily news to “decode the city and figure out what’s going on” as one historian said. With all the different backgrounds in the fast-paced lifestyle of the city, the newspaper became the only source of normality for the people. It was their way to get a handle on things as fifteen to twenty thousand immigrants were coming in each week and there was turbulence in every citizen’s life. I was amazed at how quickly the city changed and the print landscape came to be a huge part of everyone’s life.
One interesting fact I gathered from the documentary was the magnitude of how quickly New York transformed from just a barely vacant island to a complete metropolis, brimming with people from all over different cultures. The growth of New York City was unprecedented before in all of history, with no other city even comparing to its rapid growth. The documentary stated that in 1800 “New York only had 100,000 people, by 1900s it had 50x as many as people!” This statistic alone was unfathomable to me because in just 100 years the population exploded to 5 million people. Although facing many adversities with the onset of all the new changes, New York stayed resilient and avoided complete anarchy. New York became a city of greatness, a city of wealth, a city of opportunity for new immigrants, in such a short period of time. It’s speed in growth, in comparison to other major cities such as London or Paris, and the ability to stay in stable control just shows how strong and resolute this metropolis truly is.
The first aspect of the documentary that I find extremely interesting as well as relatable is how Manhattan became a center for business more than it was residential. As a commuter myself it was interesting how the documentary explained exactly how Manhattan became a place where people had to come out and travel in order to conduct business.
Another thing that also struck me was how much chaos and blood shed occurred right on the very ground I step on almost everyday. It is hard to imagine that kind go gang war happening today in New York City at that high of a magnitude. Every race was clashing against each other, every religion was clashing against each other and even political parties were clashing with each other. I learned how even after being voted in with the majority of immigrant votes, Fernando Wood was stripped of many powers as mayor. By rewriting the city charter, it caused a deadlock for the city’s government to turn the city around. It made it harder to govern the chaos occurring and allowed violence to continue. Watching this documentary made me realize where our distinct New York attitude and optimism originated from. Through all the violence and the crumbling government, New York City was able to persevere through it all and come out stronger and livelier than it was before.
One of the most striking things mentioned in the documentary which actually also found its way into the late 20th century is the immense amount of disorder and violence in New York City. It is true that New York City also had an apparent stratification in society, there were designated areas that were poor and dangerous and others that were rich and safe. This has always been the case in New York City. However, the amount of violence, namely mob and gang violence that grouped itself based on ethnicity in New York City haunted the citizens of the city for many decades. At the time discussed in this documentary, even the most major precincts rioted at City Hall calling New York City “the worst governed city in the world.” A city which at the time became the identity of America and the economic hub was also the worst governed (which can even attest to and support an argument pro-small government). However, there is a point where the government truly did not intervene as much as it should have, and this did cause an increase in violence which followed NYC into the late 1990s. New York City’s future became so important that it became synonymous with the future of America. For a city to become this impactful in such little time is striking in its own right.
The most striking thing that I learned from watching this documentary is the fact that there isn’t a single, great, all encompassing novel about New York City. New York City is one of the world’s most populated and legendary city, so the idea that there isn’t a novel praising this city is a little disappointing. As the documentary pointed out, London has Charles Dickens’ novels to relate the greatness of this city in England. So it’s a wonder to me how London has its idiosyncrasies and routines recorded in a novel while New York City doesn’t. Understandably, London is a far older city than New York, however this doesn’t justify the reason why New York is lacking this kind of written piece in its historical repertoire.
Oral narrators were treasured in many different cultures hundreds of years ago for a reason. They transmit important tales and histories about their culture and people from one generation to the next. In the same sense, a novel about New York City would serve the same purpose so it’s a bit disheartening to find that there isn’t anything of that nature yet. An all encompassing novel about New York City, I believe, would preserve the present moment of the city in the here and now and its contributions to the growing knowledge of our city would be a priceless addition.
For me, the most interesting theme that the documentary presented was the recurring opportunity for profit in New York, and the results it had on the city. It seems as though there was a common economic motive held by those who immigrated, those who sought a better lifestyle and future for children and grandchildren. Barnum’s American Museum and the widespread publication of crime stories in the beginnings of New York journalism are evidence to the claim that New York continuously brought in some of the best creative and conscious minds in its European waves of immigration. I find it particularly interesting because this fact emphasizes the observation that diversity is both NYC’s greatest strength and weakness. One could certainly argue that the search for a better life added to the city’s labor force and contributed to the rapidly growing economy, leading to projects that added to the culture and history of the city as we know it. At the same time, this ambitious motive also led to an overflow of immigrants that highlighted differences and overcrowding that caused many of the illnesses, fights, and riots that happened during the 19th century. This dual result of profit opportunities within the city was the most striking segment of the documentary.
One very surprising thing I learned from the documentary was New York City’s fascination with tabloid media at the time. I know a couple of previous posts have touched on the notion of these penny papers (e.g. the Herald) providing people with what they wanted to know as opposed to what the ought to know, however I was more shocked at the notion that these tastes were present in those times. Of course, “sex sells,” and crime and violence are always crowd pleasers; however, I believe when people think of the journalism in the 19th and 20th century, they picture a little paperboy in a crowded street screaming, “Extra! Extra! Read all about it!” while holding up a paper with a bold headline reading that “the Titanic has sunken” or something along those lines. Who do we think reads newspapers at the time? Accompanying this vision, I also picture crowd of cultured readers curiously peering world news and domestic sections, ready to passionately discuss them later. As you can imagine, it came as a great surprise to me when I discovered that past generations very generously indulged in what is now considered tabloid news. It’s essentially the modern-day equivalent of our grandparents keeping up with Kardashians, or finding out which celebrity did what with who; It just doesn’t seem right. Therefore, to discover that so many businesses successfully profited from this “cheap” news, not through high prices, but through high sales, flips the image I had of the 19th and 20th century generations and their serious mentalities onto its feet. Modern journalism really hasn’t fallen that far considering the success of these thriving penny papers.
One interesting thing that I learned from the segment of the New York documentary is about the immigration to the city in the 1800s. So many Europeans that weren’t able to make enough money to support their families back at home came to New York for another shot. Thousands upon thousands of immigrants were piling into the country at an extremely fast rate as the demand for work rose. There were so many immigrants arriving that the ones from select countries were able to come together to live in their own towns (ex- Little Germany). These countries include Germany and Ireland. They took on whatever jobs were available, even the most demanding and exhausting ones because they were so determined at starting a new lifestyle.
Now, the idea of immigrants coming to a new country for a better lifestyle isn’t anything new to me. People across the globe have been doing this for years. In fact, my parents are even people who fall into this category. The thing that’s interesting to me that I had not known before is that the mass pilings of these immigrants into the country actually brought the Americans together to form their own party, called the Know Nothing Party. They didn’t like all the immigrants arriving to their land because they felt as if they were losing their identity. I had always thought that when America, more specifically, New York, was in its developing stages, they were accepting immigrants with open arms. I had thought that they didn’t care who was coming into the country because at the end of the day their goal was to get their economy flourishing. I guess I was wrong. It seems as if when their identity came into contrast with their financial success, they took specific measures to ascertain their place in the country. Discrimination became so bad that even the Irish, for example, gained the title of “Blacks of the 19th century”.
One thing that intrigued me about the documentary was the knowledge that although the New York that we know today was built through investments, culture diversity, and the hard work of millions of immigrants and native-born New Yorkers alike over the years, it was also built by the vision and perseverance of a select few men in history that New York city rose to its height of today. After watching the documentary, I have come to believe that the contributions of the select few prominent figures in New York city’s history were more influential in the shaping of this city than of the masses who brought their culture, labor, families into New York.
For example, it was Alexander Hamilton’s belief in the greatness of the small town known as New York and his work in promoting it as an center of commerce that the budding nation chose New York as the hub of financial activity and thus set in motion its destiny as financial capital of the world. After Alexander Hamilton died, Governer DeWitt Clinton rose to take up his place as patron of New York. Like Hamilton, he could see New York’s potential as a prominent part of American society that many of his peers could not. Like Hamilton, he contributed to and changed the course of New York history by commissioning the Erie canal, an engineering marvel that brought a new wave of financial activity into New York city, and propelled New York city to its destiny of becoming not just the financial capital of the United States as Hamilton imagined, but financial capital of the world.