Comparing Rich Citizens of New York in the 1920's: Attitudes on Philanthropy
How did the rich of Hudson Valley and Harlem New York differ in behavior patterns and personal attitudes towards home ownership during 1920 to 1925? Even with the distinction of race between Hudson valley rich and Harlem rich are the two groups in anyway similar? The rich of Hudson Valley did not feel the need nor the obligation to be philanthropical towards their under class counterparts. They were desensitized towards the needs of the poor and unfortunates of society. The Harlem rich however, felt a moral and spiritual obligation to help those less fortunate then themselves to become more prosperous so that they could aspire to the joys of home ownership. Only if they felt the individuals were worthy of their help.
What were the Hudson Valley rich like? They were made up of two classes of people the Robber Barons and the Mayflower rich. In "The Rich and The Super - Rich" Ferdinand Lundberg writes that the Robber Barons gained their wealth thought crime. He writes "Crime: The Highroad to Wealth. Either sound instinct or certain knowledge led Kefauver, Kennedy, Vanderbilt and J.P. Morgan to link notorious under world figures with the business world. For crime is a historically established highroad to American fortune building. If earlier men came into the upper propertied class by means of violent crime, it would seem that later criminal practitioners might be heading toward the same dubious salvation. So assiduously and unscrupulously did the earlier fortune-builders work that one might suppose they believed that in attaining wealth they were attaining eternal life." The Mayflower rich considered themselves the true Americans since their families history could be traced all the way back the first Dutch settlers who settled in the Hudson Valley area. They did not accept the Robber Barons with open arms until their fortunes over powered the Mayflower rich in comparison. F. Scott Fitzgerald once wrote "Let me tell you about the very rich. They are different from you and me. They possess and enjoy early, and it does something to them, makes them soft where we are hard, and cynical where we are trustful, in a way that, unless you were born rich, it is difficult to understand. They think, deep in their hearts, that they are better than we are because we had to discover the compensations and refuges of life for ourselves.
Eighteenth century British theatre was perhaps the starting point that would evolve into modern theatre. Women started to be allowed on stage and acting techniques were beginning to change. Leading performers were like celebrities with a number of fans. Theatre was an intricate part of the social ladder. In the overall scheme of things the actors and actresses played an important part in making the theatre what it was. Without the performers there wouldn’t really be theatre, so in order to understand the eighteenth century British theatre the performers of that era need to be understood.
Sumner, William Graham. What Social Classes Owe to Each Other. New York: Harper & Brothers, 1883.
"Elizabethan Theatre Audiences." Elizabethan Theatre Audiences. Strayer University, 16 May 2012. Web. 24 Mar. 2014.
Americans had no savings at all(end note 3). Automotive industry mogul Henry Ford provides a striking example of the unequal distribution of wealth between the rich and the middle-class. Henry Ford reported a personal income of $14 million(end note 4) in the same year that the average personal income was $750(end note 5). By present day standards, where the average yearly income in the U.S. is around $18,500(end note 6), Mr. Ford would be earning over $345 million a year! This maldistribution of income between the rich and the middle class grew throughout the 1920's. While
Society today is split in many different ways: the smart and the dumb, the pretty and the ugly, the popular and the awkward, and of course the rich and the poor. This key difference has led to many areas of conflict among the population. The rich and the poor often have different views on issues, and have different problems within their lives. Moral decay and materialism are two issues prevalent among the wealthy, while things such as socio-economic class conflict and the American dream may be more important to those without money. Ethics and responsibilities are an area of thought for both classes, with noblesse oblige leaning more towards the wealthy. The world in the Roaring Twenties, shown in The Great Gatsby by F. Scott Fitzgerald, and the world today all hinge on the same ideas and issues, the most basic of which is the difference between the poor and the rich.
For the Elizabethan society, the theater represents a very powerful place. The theater was used as a tool for advertising and drawing the public attention to whatever is being performed. While we may consider Hamlets
“The Great Gatsby”, by F. Scott Fitzgerald depicts the vast social difference between the old aristocrats, the new self-made rich and the poor. He vividly interprets the social stratification during the roaring twenties as each group has their own problems to deal with. Old Money, who have fortunes dating from the 19th century, have built up powerful and influential social connections, and tend to hide their wealth and superiority behind a veneer of civility. The New Money made their fortunes in the 1920s boom and therefore have no social connections and tend to overcompensate for this lack with lavish displays of wealth. As usual, the No Money gets overlooked by the struggle at the top, leaving them forgotten or ignored. Such is exemplified by Jay Gatsby, Myrtle Wilson and Tom Buchanan. Their ambitions distinctly represent their class in which Fitzgerald implies strongly about.
Congress hereby finds and declares that the sex education curriculum has been wrongly denied of pursuing a thorough course in order for high schoolers to achieve a better understanding of anything sex related. Sex education, or sex ed, is an instructional course built to instruct issues relating to human sexualiy, sexual anotomy, sexual reproduction, sexual activity, reproductive health, emotional relations, reproductive rights and responsibilities, and contraceptives. Out of the 50 states in the U.S, only 18 of them are required by law to include a sexual education course available in all high schools. Of the 18 states that are required sex ed however, their curriculum differs. In some states such as Utah, youths learn about sexual education, STD’s, and abstinence until marriage, but are not provided information about contraception. In other states like Washington, teens receive information ranging from homosexuality to contraception methods. States like Utah that promote ‘abstinence-only’ sexual education courses are less effective than those like Washington, where a more in-depth sex ed course showed evidence of no encouragement of sexual activity. Washington used the comprehensive sex education program. The method that Utah used, “Abstinence-only” or “Just Say No” teachings, in spite of the fact that it educates youth on how to reject sexual advances, promote self-sufficiency, instruct the psychological health of youths who have had sex, etc. are biased and prejudiced. This bill will lower the teen ...
Russell Brown, J. 1995. The Oxford Illustrated History of the Theatre. 3rd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hillson, D, & Simon, P. (2012). Practical project risk management: The ATOM methodology (2nd ed.). Vienna, VA.: Management Concepts.
In Francis Scott Fitzgerald's The Great Gatsby, the city of New York possesses a “transitory” and “enchanted” quantity, which “for the last time in history” rivaled man's “capacity for wonder” (182). New York City, a symbol of American greatness and the American dream, contains very unamerican class distinction: those whose families have been prominent and rich for decades function as a de facto aristocracy, looking down upon and controlling (through vast wealth) the poor. These class distinctions are mirrored by geography, dividing up the maps into regions by wealth. The parallelism of the region and the residents results in the region symbolizing the residents. Through analyzing both the residents and the description of the region, a holistic understanding can be gained about the residents of Valley of Ashes, East Egg, and West Egg.
Cohen, Walter, J.E. Howard, K. Eisaman Maus. The Norton Shakespeare. Vol. 2 Stephen Greenblatt, General Editor. New York, London. 2008. ISBN 978-0-393-92991-1
Elizabethan times in the 1600s was a progression for the world of the theater. A period named after Queen Elizabeth I of England, it is from this period that modern day society has its foundation for the entertainment industry. From the violence that was prevalent because of the Black Death, people turned to the theater for its poetry and romance. During this time period, there were two types of theatrical performances that were available for the people’s viewing, comedies or tragedies. These two genres were never really intertwined until the time of William Shakespeare. His play, Romeo and Juliet, is an example of both a comedy and a tragedy. It starts off as a comedy with Romeo weeping like a baby because of his love Rosaline, who did not love him back and ends as a tragedy when Romeo and Juliet, a pair of star crossed lovers, commit suicide because the lost of each other. It was also during Shakespeare’s time that writer were finally acknowledged by the people. Before this time, writers were not considered upper classman. Another group of people that began to rise into a higher social class were the actors. Actresses were not present back then because women were not allowed on stage. It was considered unladylike to have a female actor. Men played all the parts. Theater owners were dependent on actors to make them a profit. Rehearsals for the plays were fairly short, only lasting for about a week. The performances themselves would only show for three to four days.
Scott Jardine, 2007, “Managing risk in construction projects – how to achieve a successful outcome – an article”, PricewaterhouseCoopers.
The theater was one of the primary forms of entertainment in Elizabethan England, as anyone, rich or poor could attend the plays.The rich would sit in boxes or galleries, while the poorer people would have to stand for the entirety of the play (Haigh). The poor would stand in front of the stage which would normally be raised about 4 to 6 feet and the theater could hold on average 3,000 people (Trumbull). The rich however usually watched plays in indoor private theaters, but sometimes would watch the plays in the outdoor public ones. Performances ...