Category Archives: Commentary and Critiques

Joe Gould’s Secret commentary

Posted on by

“Joe Gould’s Secret” by Joseph Mitchell is a profile about Joe Gould and Joseph Mitchell. The plot centers around Joe Gould and Mitchell’s journey of trying to figure out who Gould really is and if his Oral History truly exists. Mitchell’s record of how he goes about it says a lot about Mitchell. You can almost say it’s autobiographical. In learning about Joe Gould, Joseph Mitchell learns that he is not much different in that he too has a secret from the world. He is certain that the Oral History is not real, but he lets the committee of people searching for it believe in it. Joe Gould made strangers and those close to him believe that the Oral History was real. Joseph Mitchell almost becomes obsessed with Joe Gould when he was writing the first profile, “Professor Sea Gull.” He spent countless hours (and dollars) with Gould. “Joe Gould’s Secret” reveals that after Mitchell’s first profile on Gould was published, his obsession with Gould turned into irritation. Mitchell tries avoiding Gould and yet when Gould is very ill and eventually dies, Mitchell returns to the saga of discovering Joe Gould.

Gould is obsessed with himself. The Oral History and the attention he received from it (or what people knew of it) fueled him. That’s why he keeps the secret to himself. Without the Oral History then Gould has nothing. Without the Oral History, Mitchell really wouldn’t have much either. It is the Oral History that gives Mitchell’s profile edge. The discovery of its nonexistence gave Mitchell an edge for his second profile. Joe Gould’s secret became Joseph Mitchell’s secret when Gould died. After “Joe Gould’s Secret” was published, Mitchell’s secret was no more and the obsession of Joe Gould ended.

The two profiles also gave a good example of journalistic writing and ethics. The tone of the first one is much lighter than the second and I think that’s because Joe Gould was alive to read the first one. Once he died, the second profile was a little more grave and definitely biased in that it was written in first-person. The first profile gave Joseph Mitchell credibility to write the second one.

2 Jobs at Sugar Factory, Vivian Lee

Posted on by

Vivian Lee wrote an exemplary profile on Robert Shelton, a former employee of the Domino Sugar factory located in the Williamsburg section of Brooklyn, New York.  The article was written as the the plant was set to close its doors permanently. Mr. Shelton returned to the site for the first time in 10 years to work as a volunteer at a temporary art show.

I enjoyed how Lee analyzed the generational change in industrial Williamsburg.  Factories like Domino Sugar once stood and operated in the heart of the city providing many like Mr. Shelton with jobs and opportunities.  The former site of the Domino Sugar factory has now become an attraction for the young and hip appreciators of art who have flocked to see a glimpse of Kara Walker’s, “A Sublety,” a large sphinx that symbolizes a black woman in the south. It honors the lives of the African Americans  slaves that were apart of the sugar trade in the 19th century.

Lee’s tone throughout the article reflects Mr. Shelton’s nostalgic trip through his former, “Sugar House.” It detailed the longs days, nights, weekends, and holidays that he spent in the factory for twenty years.  It also detailed his departure which still weighs heavy on Mr. Shelton.  Change is inevitable and its effects are felt by all. There is a plan in place to build high-rise condominiums on the former site of the Domino Sugar factory, a trend that is becoming increasingly popular in changing neighborhoods.  Mr. Shelton will only have his memories once the factory stands no more.

Sugar Factory Article Response

Posted on by

In the article 2 Jobs at Sugar Factory, and a Lump in the Throat, the author chronicles the story of one particular Robert Shelton and his experience working at the Domino sugar factory. However, as one reads on, the story becomes less and less about Robert Shelton and more about the sugar factory and its history. Nowadays, it is slated to close, long after Domino moved out of the area. And yet, the factory remains important enough for the mayor to visit, and that is due to the contribution of the factory to the art world, housing a sugar statue depicting an African American slave woman as a tribute to the slaves that built the sugar trade in the 1800s.

It is worth noting however, that despite the factory’s importance to those who like art, the author acknowledges that it is merely another factory that is closing in the area to make way for new buildings, like many others before it. If nothing else, the fact that there is acknowledgment that at the end of the day the factory is merely a factory is important, indicating that even though culturally the building might have some significance, to the average person it is another building that will be replaced and nothing more. Even Robert Shelton realizes this at the end of the article, that short of being incredibly rich and or influential, nothing can stop the progress of time.

Amanda Burden Response

Posted on by

The lede of this article introduces Amanda M. Burden immediately by a description of her sophisticated physical appearance in contrast to her “drab” physical surroundings. The lede reflects the format of the article. The article goes back and forth between Burden’s supporters and opposers.

Within this profile there’s a conflict story. The story addresses Burden’s important role in rezoning the majority of Manhattan in a short period of time, which was coming to an end. It covers Burden getting personal with the local communities and the “small projects” within them. It also covers Burden’s initiatives on skyscrapers and creating a gentrified New York through rezoning and building restrictions.

The writer’s interviewees are leaders of organizations and local communities. They are accredited sources because of their positions and connections to the actions of Amanda Burden.

The president of the Municipal Art Society of New York praised Burden for her efforts. The art society president called Burden’s work a “renaissance,” reflecting on the beautification of the city created. Following that quote, the writer adds a statement of criticism from the executive director of the Greenwich Village Society for Historic Preservation. The director’s concern was about the dramatic change in cost to live due to the city’s rezoning. These two sources weigh in on the conflict from different perspectives.

After establishing the issue and how some may feel, the writer goes on to describe Burden’s background and upbringing. Burden seemed to have always been a “somebody.” Even that background contrasted to her story of leaving that life to become an urban planner.

As the article continues to go into the experiences others have had with her, it follows the back and forth format. Community board chairmen applauded Burden for exploring their communities at a street level and trying to help the smaller projects. Some oppose Burden’s new development plans for neighborhoods. One of the writer’s sources, Julia Vitullo-Martin, felt that the new developments neglected the “greatness” of New York and its skyscrapers by adding height restrictions on buildings. The writer, again, is juxtaposing different viewpoints.

The writer also adds Burden’s comments throughout the article that defends Burden’s actions. An example of this is when she comments about how the High Line generated jobs and value for developers. The writer also gives Burden the last quotes of the story. The very last being about New York’s neighborhoods:

“I’m hopeful that what we have done is ensure in the next 15, 20 years, as the city grows, the identity of these neighborhoods will remain intact.”

This quote tries to appeal to those in favor of Burden’s efforts and those who want zones and building restrictions to stay the same.