Silas Lapham - Blog Post Seven

After our class discussion on the difference between the "Upper Crustys" and the "Non Crustys" in The Rise of Silas Lapham I couldn't help but wonder whether or not an "Upper Crust" can ever embody the positive character traits of a "Non Crusty." I began thinking about different people within our modern day society that are of an "Upper Crusty" status but still have not strayed from moral value. How bout Bill Gates? Many people consider him to be a philanthropist...

This couple started Shawmut Construction in Bosoton and then sold it to their employees. Now they dedicate their lives to philanthropy all over the world and started the Ansara Family Fun and the Haiti Fund out of the Boston Foundation. They donated over 2 million dollars to start the Haiti Fund. What do you think the Corey's would think about the Ansara family?

Finally...OPRAH! Probably one of the most famous philanthropist, and one of the wealthiest women in the world (shes a big Upper Crusty) can we deny her positive impact on the world?

Maybe we need to think of another name for "Upper Crustys" who've made an Impact??

Silas Lapham and the Social Rise - Blog Post Six

After watching Sam's hilarious videos in class today, I thought that I'd add some youtube humor to my blog as well. Over the course of Silas Lapham, we see the Laphams push their new money against the Corey's old money. The Corey's reject the idea of the Lapham's newly found wealth, and seem to believe that they can never be equals. I find it interesting that the amount of actual money that either families have is not really what mattershttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTTEpRq9bmE. Instead, the origin of the money is what seems to be important.

I then began thinking about our society today and whether or not the idea of new or old money still applied...then I remembered this clip of this trashy MTV show I happened to see a few weeks ago. The show, "You're Cut Off" is about rich, spoiled women who are cut off from their families money. Even though these girls are just short of, if not millionaires, are they classy? What would the Corey's say about them? Does their money represent new or old, and aren't they trashy even tough they represent a higher social class?

See for yourself! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTTEpRq9bmE

"How the Other Half Lives" by Jacob Riis - Blog Post Five

Jacob Riis' How the Other Half Lives is a non fiction, historically accurate account of the poverty and tenement housing in New York City's Lower East Side. In comparison to our other readings, I found it very helpful to get an in depth view of the conditions that many immigrants faced upon coming to America. Riis' article proved to be a bit more arduous to get through because it did not use any sort of humor or comedic relief to draw its readers in. However, I did find that the tragic reality that so many people during the 19th century horrifying. Riis' article looked at the "Genesis of the Tenement," as well as the different types of diseases that these people were exposed to and the virtually unlivable conditions of the tenement houses. Like Twain and Crane, Riis' constructs poverty throughout the course of his book to pain a picture of loss and deprivation. Furthermore, although all three authors approach the subject of "rich and poor" within America in very different ways, after reading Riis' article, they all seem to center on the same issues regarding money. Extreme poverty, as seen in Crane and Riis, and even extreme wealth, as seen in Twain can cause a lack of family or domestic life, a decline in health (mental and physical), a downfall in an employment and economic system, as well as an obsession with social climbing and survival.

"Maggie" Blog Post Four

While reading "Maggie," I was thinking about her inevitable fate and how it relates to society today and the "fate" of people who grow up in the projects, live below the poverty line, or in very poor areas of the country. I couldn't help but wonder if Maggie was subjected to such a horrible life style and eventual sad demise simply because she didn't have any other choice. I would like to think that, yes, if Maggie had worked hard and tried a little bit more, she would have been able to break free from the slums, leave behind her dysfunctional family and create change within her life. However, it seems as though Maggie's situation, or horrible home life project her on a path that can only lead to destruction. Maggie is unable to see the phony that Pete really is because she is only looking for something even slightly better than what she has. She cannot control her mother's drunken outrages and the complete destruction of her home. She also cannot control the fact that she lacks the money or resources to break free from her tenement house and try to move up in society. In relation to America today and the poverty that exists within our country, inner city students and kids have to succeed within our nation or children who have grown up in very poor areas of the country are parallel with Maggie because of their lack of resources and chance to succeed. Although there are few rare cases about the "child who broke free from the projects, got an education, and became the CEO of a well known company," the reality is that the majority of children and people living in poverty stay their for the entirety of their lives. Citizens that live below the poverty line lack the same things that Maggie lacked within "Maggie." There is no education, economic and employment opportunities are almost non existent, a stable family life is rare, and they grow up in areas where crime rates are high and people are just trying to get by. Without any of these resources, it is evident that just "working hard" won't allow most poor people to find any sort of redemption or freedom from their struggles. The picture below is of the projects in Camden, NJ-20 minutes outside of where I grew up. If you can't tell, there are people sleeping in cardboard boxes beside the run down houses. Looking at this picture, and after reading Maggie, I feel as though luck and a lot of chance plays into the ability for those suffering from extreme poverty to thrive. How can we expect anyone living under these condition, and suffering from the same things that Maggie lacked, to avoid the same sort of demise that Maggie did?

"Maggie" Blog Post Three

I found that one of the most interesting elements within "Maggie," was the dysfunction that Maggie's alcoholic mother creates. Besides the fact that Maggie's family is poor, I couldn't help but wonder about her mother, Mary, and the household that Mary herself was raised in. In many novels, it is rare to see such an aggressive mother, as it is more the father figure that takes the role of abusive alcoholic. In "Maggie," however, we see Mary tear apart the house, destroy any sort of semblance of home that Maggie tries to create and abuse her children and husband throughout the entirety of the novella. We also see her sobbing over her daughter's death at the end of the novel as if she cared about Maggie. It seems as though Mary also grew up in the slums and was subjected to the same sort of domestic violence that she now inflicts on her family. Would Maggie suffer from the same terrible fate if she had had a stable mother or a stronger familial bond? I asked myself this question at the end of the novella, and while I do believe that Maggie may have avoided death and the destruction of her dignity, I think that she still would have taken even worse path's in order to try and create a better life for herself. Regardless of Maggie's home life, and Mary's childhood, the lack of money and resources seem to be the root to all of their problems. Alcohol abuse, domestic violence, or not Maggie was in search of something better. I think that a story with a functional family life, but one that still suffered from extreme poverty would be an interesting case study to look at and compare to "Maggie."


In the Oscar nominated movie Precious, actress Monique plays an alcoholic, abusive mother.

"The 30000 Bequest" Blog Post Two

After reading "The 30000 Bequest" I couldn't help but be reminded of a summer camp that I've worked at for many many summers. Twain focuses on the destruction of his characters because of wealth, and many of my campers suffer from this same predicament. I feel like it is a common misconception to think that only poor people suffer from issues surrounding money and a lack of basic life necessities. However, after a summer at camp, I found that children who have grown up with extreme amounts of wealth can also suffer from this same plight. Although I only had eight, 16 year old girls in my "camper section," I worked directly with campers ranging from ages 10 to 18. Most of the campers come from EXTREMELY wealthy backgrounds and were all suffering because of their lack of family life and guidance. Many of my girls we're dealing with parents who have shipped them to camp after camp as well as boarding school and were raised by nannies who have done everything from bottle feeding them to cleaning their rooms for their entire lives. Many of my campers have never had someone tell them that they loved them and I found that most of the kids were just living a very disconnected life. This is not to say that money is the root of all evil, or that there were some campers who had thrived off of living such a luxurious life; however, I found it so interesting that even though the families of the campers literally could have everything they've ever wanted they lacked any moral compass and most of the campers suffered from a desperate need for attention. Many of the younger girls have never even been taught how to pick out their own clothes because they have had someone do it for them, and many of the campers were unable to even make a bed or take a proper shower. In relation the "The 30000 Bequest" I found working at this camp not only extremely fascinating, but also devastating. Like the Foster family, many of the families that ship their kids off to the camp that I work at also are unable to grasp some of the basic necessities of life and live far from reality.

**Please notice this kids shirt...

"The 30000 Bequest" Blog Post One

Twain's "The 30000 Bequest" constructs the notion of wealth as a corrupt system that overpowers the two main characters, Aleck and Sally. Twain switches between gender roles between the husband and wife in "The 30000 Bequest" to create a comedic air while also and to playing up the idea of money and social status as destructive figures. I found that Twain's use of irony throughout the course of the story also creates an air of humor that is present from beginning to end. When the story open's, Twain describes The Foster's life as very prosperous and happy. Sally is a man earning a handsome salary and his wife Aleck is happy in her husband, and her children. Their life seems almost picturesque. Once the money is introduced, it is then that everything seems to go awry. First, Sally and Alecks' daughters are never mentioned again except for in relation to the elaborate marriage plans that the couple creates for their children. The Foster family life becomes a thing of the path, and it is soon the money that becomes all consuming. With the disappearance of the familial structure, Aleck and Sally also begin to lose their marriage, their friends, and even their sanity. The delusions that they create about the large non-existent sum of money end up destroying everything that they had before they knew about the money as well as the dreams they create surrounding the money. Even though Aleck and Sally are not suffering financially, and are convinced that they will soon be the recipients of a significant financial gain, they still fall to some of the same things that people who live below the poverty line suffer from. The Foster's not only watch their family break apart, but they also have a physical and moral decay. Their obsession with material possession is reminiscent of those who suffer from a lack of money and resources. Twain uses the Fosters as a parallel to the lives of poverty stricken people and creates irony within their lifestyle to show that money can tear apart lives if not dealt with carefully no matter what social status or class.