The Other America and Nickel and Dimed
The two authors address the issue of poverty and the poor in more or less a same way. The notion of poverty and the poor defined by the two authors is the same. Both of them attempt to arouse the public opinion and sentiments by targeting the non poor members and groups in a society. The reform tradition of the past is criticized by the two authors as it presents the image of the poor as those who rush towards the relief offices which is a fatuous fact itself. They call an acute need for reform by the government as well as the need to see the poor as visible individuals of the society by the non poor. They hold the view that the culture of poverty deforms dignity and spirit and thrushes the people towards petty work conditions.
Poverty is defined as the condition of scarcity of basic needs, water, nutrition, education, health facilities, etc. Harringtons own knowledge of poverty, says Isserman, was decidedly second hand (Isserman). Harrington in his book has reflected on the notion of culture of poverty, a phrase coined by Oscar Lewis (an anthropologist), who was of the view that poverty is not necessarily the absence of wealth but it created its own subculture so that the poor, who were raised within it, were likely to be confined (Isserman).
Poverty in the U.S., according to Harrington, has formed a culture and a way of life as he says that the U.S. has a culture of poverty beyond history, beyond progress, sunk in paralyzing, maiming routine (Harrington). The echoes of Lewis are heard in Harringtons work as he argues that American poverty constituted a separate culture, another nation, with its own way of life (Harrington).
Harrington defines poverty as more extensive and tenacious than most Americans assumed (Isserman). The dilemma of the American society, describes Harrington, is that the poor are invisible that is one of the most important things about them (Harrington). The poor are not simply neglected and forgotten but they are not seen which is much worse (Harrington). The fate of the poor, describes Harrington, hangs upon the decision of the better-off (Harrington). Moreover Harrington defines poor Americans in terms of the people who lack education and skill, who have bad health, poor housing, low levels of aspiration and high level of mental stress and if one problem is solved, and the others are left constant, there is little gain (Harrington).
While Harrington denounces the definition of the poor as those people racing to the relief office for the reason that the poor in the American society are not born poor but most of them became poor after obtaining stability after 1930s and 1940s and that they just want to go on welfare (Harrington). Harrington defines poverty as an evident fact of a society, although the poor are seen as invisible as in the post war era poverty became removed from the living, emotional experience of millions upon millions of middle-class Americans and it used to be assumed that ours is an affluent society which is an ironic fact itself (Harrington).
While enlightening the cause and consequence of poverty, Harrington takes the stance that it is the culture of poverty that exists in the state and it serves to twist and deform the spirit. The cause of poverty, according to Harrington, is not mainly economic only but the society itself allows poverty to persist, therefore such suffering is an abomination in a society where it is needless that anything that can be done should be done (Harrington).
The culture of poverty has proved immune to progress and it is not the failures of the Americans that has brought poverty (Harrington). The need to recognize, according to the author of The Other America, the culture of poverty is acute and the call of the time as it profoundly affects how one moves to destroy poverty (Harrington). Harringtons much professed concept of the culture of poverty implies that it is not that people are poor as an individuals owing to their own choice, rather he argues that the poor is the product of society in which they live
Harrington attempts to arouse public opinion by directing his critique towards them as he blames the ignorant society of the America as the prime responsible for the evil monster (of poverty). He argues that the Americans must be ashamed to live in the rich society along with the presence of the enormous number of the poor. Harrington also warns the American people that if the shame and anger over the existence of the poor are not forthcoming, someone can write a book about the other America a generation from now and it will be the same or the worse (Harrington).
Not only this, but he is able to capture the attention of the readers by his threatening warning that the vicious circle of poverty can engulf those sections of society who are not poor but the drastic condition of society makes them vulnerable to the threat of poverty and impoverishment. Harrington exposed poverty of the rural areas and the inner cities of America. Harringtons The Other America Poverty in the United States had so powerful influence upon the readers that it served to lay an impact on John F. Kennedy, who was among the readers of the book, who commmenced to consider the legislation against poverty. Time Magazine in 1999 rated The Other America among the influential books of 20th century despite the fact that Harringtons thesis on the culture of poverty, discussed in his book, has been criticized for its ambiguity (Isserman).
Harringtons perceived agenda for reform was based on the proposal for remedial action which, Harrington argued, was needed by America in lieu of the reliance upon the rising tide of affluence to lift all the boats (Isserman). Harrington proposed that the U.S. needs a broad program of remedial action as a comprehensive assault on poverty that would help to bring reform in the condition of the poor (Harrington).
Harrington makes the use of Oscar Lewiss concept of the culture of poverty interchangeably with that of the vicious circle of poverty to imply poor living conditions leading to poor health, poor attendance at school or work, and so on (Isserman). Harrington was of the view that additional income can help to break the vicious circle of poverty in which the poor finds himself (Harrington).
Although Harringtons thesis on the culture of poverty is criticized for its vagueness but the book is eulogized owing to the moral clarity that it serves to convey as Harrington professes that the Americans must be ashamed for the fact that in their rich society an enormous number of people is poor (Isserman). If the shame and anger over existence of poverty and the poor in American society, warns Harrington, are not forthcoming, someone can write a book about the other America a generation from now and it will be the same or worse (Harrington).
When the legendary work of Barbara Ehrenrich is analyzed it comes to light that her description and analysis of poverty reflect the reform tradition as exemplified by Harrington in The Other America. In Nickel and Dimed Barbara Ehrenreich describes, says Janet Dine, the lifestyle of to which the lower half of the restructured equation are condemned in the richest country of the world (Dine 15). The book articulates the contemporary socioeconomic crisis which she locates to the broader sociopolitic climate. Welfare reform itself is a factor, says Ehrenreich, weighing against any close investigation of the conditions of the poor (Ehrenreich, Nickel and Dimed On (Not) Getting by in America 217).
Ehrenreichs definition of the poor resembles with Harringtons as the two define the poor in the context of society where the poor are ignored to the extent that they are denied living existence. As Ehrenreich argues that the affluent rarely see the poor, or if they do catch sight of them in some public space, rarely know what they are seeing, since-thanks to consignment stores and Wal-Mart that the poor are usually able to disguise themselves as members of the more comfortable classes (Ehrenreich, Nickel and Dimed 216). The U.Sworking poor have become invisible to upper income groups.
The poverty of so many millions of Americans, argues Ehrenreich, must be seen as a state of emergency (Ehrenreich, Nickel and Dimed On (Not) Getting by in America 214). When the rich and the poor compete for housing on the open market, the poor dont stand a chance (Ehrenreich, Nickel and Dimed 199). Ehrenreich dscribes the way the rich can always outbid them (poor), buy up their tenements and trailer parks, and replace them with condos, Mc Mansions, golf courses, or whatever they like and thus the monopoly of the rich further backs the poor (Ehrenreich, Nickel and Dimed 199).
The author identifies the causes of poverty as inherent in the system of the society where the poor is invinsible and the poverty is a matter of fact so must be shrugged over without much heed. Here the author is in line with Harrington who also identifies the cause of povert in embedded in the society since, says Ehrenreich, the rich have become numerous, thanks largely to rising stock prices and executive salaries, the poor have necessarily been forced into housing that is more expensive, more dilippidated, or more distant from their places of work (Ehrenreich, Nickel and Dimed 199). Where Harrington says that the fate of the poor hangs upon the decision of the better off so says Ehrenreich that it is the blessings of the rich that have forged the poor into deteriorating condition.
The author calls for the need to incur reforms in economic laws although she has the realization that economic laws linking low employment to wage increases may no longer be operative (Ehrenreich, Nickel and Dimed 202). The seriouness of the issue of poverty is so immense that Ehrenreich reported the extent of anxiety over the failure to secure jobs along with the anxiety over the low wages.
Moreover the callousness of the authorities also evinces itself through the utter ignorance of the issue by the Republicans and the Democrates. The particular political moment says Ehrenreich, what almost looks like a conspiracy of silence on the subject of poverty and the poor (Ehrenreich, Nickel and Dimed On (Not) Getting by in America 217).
She describes poverty in terms of the diminutive details of the possessions of the poor as it consists of lunch consisting of Doritos or Hot dog rolls, leading to faintness before the end of shift and the home that is also a car or a van while the health care facilities are absent (Ehrenreich, Nickel and Dimed On (Not) Getting by in America 214).
The illness or injury that must be worked through with gritted teeth because theres no sick pay or health insurance and the loss of one days pay will mean no groceries for the next, are the experiences that are not part of a sustainable lifestyle, rather are emergency situations by any standard of subsistence (Ehrenreich, Nickel and Dimed On (Not) Getting by in America 214).
Ehrenreichs attempt to arouse public opinion is similar to that of Harrington as the two of them invokes the public emotions by directly targetting their responsibilities. Ehrenreichs writing style and the tone in the book moves and challenges the secure readers as she states that it is common among the nonpoor to think of poverty as a sustainable condition and it is harder for the non poor to see poverty as acute distress (Ehrenreich, Nickel and Dimed On (Not) Getting by in America 214). The author of the book calls the non poor to consider the condition of the poor that the labor and petty lives of the poor support the lives of the priviliged ones.
Michael Harringtons The Other America Poverty in the United States and Barbara Ehrenreichs Nickel and Dimed address the controversial issues of poverty in the United States in their times. The two writers authored the book in different times but the enormous issue of poverty was not vanished from the state of America.
The two authors describe the notion of the poor as they are seen as invisible individuals of the society by the non poor people. Harrrington and Ehrenreich present proposal for the government and the non poor people regarding poverty. The authors, Harrington and Ehrenreich, have addressed the universal issues that are haunting the whole world, no matter it is the poor states or the richer ones (like the U.S.).
The issue of poverty has become so horrendous for the U.S. that there is an acute need for reforms in this sphere. Ehrenrich and Harrington emphasize the issue with such vividity and mastery that their words become more effective than the annual reports issued by the organizations of the United Nations. Harringtons work is not fiction but exerts a strong impact on the consciousness of the readers. Besides the outbursts by the intelligentsia very few steps were taken to solve the problem of poverty.
The main difference between the works of the two authors is that where Harrington talks about the poor and poverty, Ehrenreich discusses the low wage earners as the center of her argument. While the stance behind the creation of the masterpieces, The Other America and Nickel and Dimed, of the two authors shares semblance to a great extent as both the authors felt acutely the sensitivity of the issue of poverty and played their role in evoking the consciousness of their audience to sense the urgency of the issue.
Categories:
0 comments:
Post a Comment