“Ms. Burden argues that gentrification is merely a pejorative term for necessary growth.”I agree that gentrification will inevitably happen but I disagree that a neighborhood will not grow without it. Creating expensive housing will only drive out the poor. If this development occurs in all neighborhoods, where will the poor go?
Adding phrases like “clipped diction”, “sophisticated dress” gives the reader the opportunity to get to know Burden a little. Although her office is worn out, according to the article, Burden makes time to dress well. Also, by describing her office as worn out, Satow implies that Burden doesn’t waste tame by decorating her office. That detail gives the reader the implication that the condition of her office is not a priority, but that the condition of our neighborhoods are.
Overall, i think Statow was fair but not completely objective when she wrote this article.
Statow emphasizes her past of being a socialite, implying that it might have an influence over her plans for New York. Statow uses phrases like “glossy condominiums and parkland” implies that Burden may want to transform the city with shiny buildings.
Also, the title “Amanda Burden Wants to Remake New York. She Has 19 Months Left” seems as if Statow is counting down the time Burden has left perhaps because she wants someone else to take Burdens place. The title also made me feel like Statow was implying that since Burden only has 19 months left, she may be making rush decisions in order for everything to be done before she has to step down.
