Research Critical Analysis

Draft 1

NYCHA: Exacerbated by Time

Public housing is a system in New York City, was designed to relieve housing-stress on cost-burdened households, those who delegate thirty-percent or more of their annual income on rent. In reality the system of affordable housing has created a mess of problems. The New York Housing Authority (NYCHA) not only has a history of prejudice, but a blatant apathy towards its clients. Poor maintenance causes health problems for its residents and perpetuates the cycle of poverty. In the New York Time article, “The Rise and Fall of New York Public Housing: An Oral History” Luis Ferrè-Sadurni affectively relays the history of NYC housing policy from the forties until today. He collages quotes, photographs, captions, and supplementary text conveying context, to craft the narrative of the people housed in NYCHA and the hardships they have faced through time. Sadurni gains credibility from his readers by using quotes from longtime residents of public housing facilities, NYCHA employees, and historians. The residents bring the hard and fast reality, the employees explain the intention and ability of NYCHA at a given point in time, and the historians bring a breadth of knowledge and expertise. He engages the readers emotionally through evocative language bolstered by photographs. This story, Sadurni is saying, is the story of the individual- a personal pain inflicted by a politically apathetic hand. Sadurni however fails to address a few dimensions of the NYCHA’s complex problems. His collage leaves out the details. Residents of the dilapidated housing units suffer insurmountable stress on a day to day basis. This affects their lives and diminishes their quality of life. Failure to address the current state of deterioration makes necessary repairs accumulate, causing further economic

stress on the city. Lastly, his article fails to discuss government technicalities, leaving his reader without direction.

In giving over this emotional saga, the author begins at the creation of NYCHA in 1934 by Mayor Fiorello LaGuardia. This was an expression of brewing liberalism, and the desire for equality. Despite noble intentions, reality harbored discrimination, yielding comfort and enabling upward mobility only to a select few. Sadurni is aiming to tell the tale of these withering values. The author frames the projects as “slum-clearing machine that reshaped the city,” following an provocative photograph of rubble and ruins against New York’s powerful skyscrapers. The picture portrays the exhibition of public housing as destructive while the words speak of a robotic process, that brought drastic and unconsidered change. In hoping to appeal to a critical audience, the author uses the vague terminology, such as “reshape” begging readers to challenge this resultant “shape”; to ask whom does this new form serve? Luis Ferrè-Sadurni answers the question in the negative: initially it is not for minorities nor for the destitute.

In arguing that historically the policy favored a more middle-class crowd, Sadurni brings primary sources to sway his audience. Reasons for rejecting housing applications included, “alcoholism, irregular work history, single motherhood and lack of furniture,” reasons progressives of today would perceive as morally reprehensible. He sandwiches this note between two photos. Above, an image of well-dressed white woman, waiting in line in 1947 at NYCHA’s office. “When my mother came,” quotes a longtime resident at the Queensbridge houses, “only white people lived here,” he interjects. Followed by the second photo of a prim white girl drying dishes with her smiling white mother. On a deeper level, Luis Fèrre-Sadurni is portraying racism as a generational issue. This is also effective because housing is as much a family issue as an individual one. Policy began to shift away from blatant discriminations, in the seventies, a is clear in the photo Sadurni chooses. He crafts a vignette of four smaller photos of both black and

white people: of a single woman, mother and daughter, cat, grandma and child, and a family. Each of these photos has sufficient lighting, an instrumental element to a healthy home. Each of these homes looks furnished. In this moment he is painting a happy picture, as the seventies were the glory days of public housing, that the author yearns to revive. Although racial discrimination in the application process dissipated in the seventies, zoning laws spurned a different type of racism and classism that Sadurni fails to mention. This is addressed by Brian Connolly, an expert on land use, in his article, “Promise unfulfilled? Zoning, disparate impact, and affirmatively furthering fair housing.” He discusses that poorer families were pushed to the edges of the city on the worst land, and grouped together. Connolly stresses, “it is important to note that local land use decisions are influenced by many factors…public health, safety, and welfare concerns to a point, it would be naïve to ignore occasionally invidious social objectives…as cities grew, multifamily zone districts were often used as buffers to separate single family districts—mostly white—and unwanted land use.” This point is reiterated by economist Jenny Schutz, an economist, in an article she wrote that blames zoning as the main cause of failed housing policy. In “Cost, Crowding, or Commuting? Housing Stress on the Middle Class” she asserts, “Local zoning laws that restrict development of apartments in wealthy neighborhoods continue to reinforce high levels of racial segregation.” One would not be able to detect these racial undertones that lingered seventies and last until today from Sadurni’s essay.

Luis Ferrè-Sadurni creates an emotional juxtaposition of the utopic seventies against dystopic nighties during the crack epidemic. This emphasizes the fleeting nature of successful affordable housing. Despite the fiscal-crisis and crumbling condition of in the broader city public housing thrived during the seventies. In the spirit of appreciation and gratitude many of NYCHA’s residents volunteered to patrol NYCHA property in addition to a specially designated unit of the NYPD. To further motif of “youth” Sadurni selected an image of young black volunteer patrollers, empowered by their ability to contribute. This is followed by a quote from NYCHA’s manager, “If a problem came along there was enough money [to fix it].” Even though at the time New York was in debt, they felt a budget for housing necessary thereby designating sufficient funds to NYCHA. This is a subtle way the Sadurni asks his readers to be critical, and challenge the priorities of the current government against the historical one. This prosperity was soon overshadowed by crack epidemic of the nineties. Author of The Last Neighborhood Cops, Gregory Umbach confirms this saying, “As New York falls apart in the nineteen seventies…the housing authority’s projects were anchors of stability and safety…The nineteen eighties is the first time when you’re more at risk of criminal violence on NYCHA property than you are in your surrounding neighborhood.” It is between these two eras that Sadurni poses the four-photo vignette discussed above, of happy families in warm homes. Sadurni incorporates a vivid description by a resident of the projects in Brooklyn to impress upon the reader the severity of the circumstance. L.B. Tillman describes the constant insecurity as follows, “…fights everyday, shootouts everyday…” And Jenkins a resident in Harlem echoes, “Every place you step, you would step on a crack bottle…the [would] get stuck in the groove of your shoe.” Suddenly the reader realizes that the passion necessary to maintain the ideal of public housing was quickly forsaken.

Throughout the twenty-first century the system of public housing has continued to wane. Sadurni makes this point not only by hitting on themes he assessed previously, but also showing the deteriorating conditions of housing. The author personifies NYCHA as a “victim” of neglect. It [NYCHA] succumbs to the accumulating debt of the city which is further exacerbated by Hurricane Sandy in twenty-twelve. In the use of images of cracked paint, of filthy, crowded apartments, of a room heated by just a stove and a child huddled beneath a not-so-warm blanket, Sadurni emphasizes how policy translates to reality. He propounds the symbol of youth, and innocent suffering in the images. Readers of the New York Times are assumed to be comfortable enough to pay for their subscription, and therefore it is reasonable they can afford a sufficient blankets. Here, Sadurni is exposing his audience to a lifestyle they would not tolerate and showing how NYCHA pushes its clients into a losing situation. “These building have more than your normal wear and tear.” “They stopped doing preventative maintenance,” admits Gregory Floyd, a representative of NYCHA employees. In choosing to personify NYCHA, Sadurni is articulating the significance of “home.” Home is supposed to be an incubator for a family and a safe haven for the individual, not a government sanctioned hell.

Until describing the twentieth-first century, the photos Sadurni uses are all black and white, from archived issues of The New York Times. It makes the article seem outdated and irrelevant. Suddenly, when he begins discussing the two-thousands, things are real, pain is The images are in color; instantly it is present, it is tangible beyond a string of memory. Color builds up the expectation of prosperity; in color he unhinges said expectation. NYCHA is still under funded; it is in dire need of renovation but forgotten by the apathy of politicians, for those with the progressive values but none of the passion. Luis Ferrè-Sadurni wants to stir the passion. He wants to awaken the values of progressive NYT readers. He is not seeking to make an intellectual argument, nor does he offer a deep analysis of the why’s and how’s that destroyed NYCHA rather he speaks of the impact. His article is an analysis of the “so-what”. He brings this article in full circle, showing the cycle of suffering, and the apathy towards the “unstable home”. He began graphically describing the homes as concentrated in their faults, “No heat. Leaking roofs. Mold and pests. Interminable waits for basic repair.” In twenty-eighteen, a grandmother “…used an open oven to heat the apartment she shares with her grandson Michael this winter.” These are the inhumane conditions whose impact is shown through imagery, and quoted experience persisting until the end. He ends by a quote from Tino Hernandez, the Chairman atNYCHA, “I’m heartbroken because this is an important resource for poor people in New York City.” Here, Luis Ferrè-Sadurni is ambiguous. It is unclear if he is merely quoting, or if he is ascribing blame to NYCHA’s “brokenhearted” chairman.

The major flaw in Luis Ferre-Sadurni’s article, “The Rise and Fall of New York Public Housing: An Oral History” is that it only grazes the causes and the solutions of NYC’s failed policies relating to public housing. It is clear that Sadurni values public housing- it is clear that he values people- it is clear that he is antidiscrimination and it is clear that he knows the history he is reporting on. He is successful in gaining emotional backing of his readers, but to be channeled, how? It is unclear what he wants his readers, likely an intelligent, informed and openminded crowd to do. They are New Yorkers and they want the best for their city, and they want it to stay colorful. Yet, he raises awareness with no inkling of solution. He gives no information on what steps must be taken to equip NYCHA with more funding. Sadurni’s tone is critical but not precise. In the greater discussion of affordable housing, Jenny Schutz, a scholar of economics, points to zoning as a contemporary issue with racial implications. the worst neighborhoods and ultimately resulting in other forms of housing stress beyond living condition and affordability. These include commute distance, quality of education, safety etc. She also discusses that housing, unlike food and health insurance isn’t a default provision guaranteed to all U.S. citizens. In creating a vision for the “anti-home” of NYCHA’s public housing today, and using a sympathetic tone, it can be inferred that Sadurni also thinks housing should be a universal right, yet he fails to articulate this. Furthermore, at the beginning of his article, Sadurni touches upon the selectivity of affordable housing in NYC but fails to explain its evolution through time. Though, these technicalities were not the focus of Sadurni’s tone, and his tone was more informative, of the issue than a plea for political action, it would have been helpful for him to guide his readers to more resource, perhaps through the use of hyperlinks. Passion without action is futile.

Draft 2

NYCHA: Exacerbated by Time

Public housing is a system in New York City, run by the New York City Housing Authority (NYCHA) designed to relieve housing-stress on cost-burdened households; those who delegate thirty-percent or more of their annual income on rent. In reality the system of affordable housing has created a mess of problems. NYCHA not only has a history of prejudice, but a blatant apathy towards its clients. Not only has the system created health problems for its residents, but it perpetuates the cycle of poverty. In the New York Times article, “The Rise and Fall of New York Public Housing: An Oral History” Luis Ferrè-Sadurni affectively relays the history of NYC housing policy from the forties until today. In his collages of quotes, photographs, captions, and supplementary text conveying context, he is able to effectively tell the fraught history, capturing his audience with ethos and pathos. Sadurni gains credibility from his readers by using quotes from longtime residents of public housing facilities, managers at New York Housing Authority (NYCHA) and historians. The residents bring the hard and fast reality, the employees explain the intention and ability of NYCHA at a given moment, and the historians bring a breadth of knowledge and expertise. He engages the readers emotionally through evocative language bolstered by photographs. This story, Sadurini is saying, is the story of the individual- a personal pain inflicted by the politically apathetic hand. Sadurini however fails to address a few dimensions of the problems of NYCHA. His collage leaves out the details. Residents of the dilapidated housing units suffer insurmountable stress on a day to

day basis. Failure to address the current state of deterioration makes necessary repairs accumulate, causing further economic stress on the city. Sadurni’s article fails to discuss technicalities, leaving his reader without direction.

To create an emotional saga, the author begins at the creation of NYCHA in 1934 by Mayor Fiorello LaGuardia, as a failed expression of noble values. NYCHA was intended to appeal to brewing liberalism, and the desire for equity. Following an evocative photograph of rubble and ruins against New York’s powerful skyscrapers the author describes the building of the projects as a “slum-clearing machine that reshaped the city,”. The picture portrays the exhibition of public housing as destructive while the words speak of a robotic process that brought drastic and unconsidered change. In hoping to appeal to a critical audience, the author uses the vague terminology, “reshape” begging readers to challenge this “emergent shape.” He hopes they ask themselves, whom does this new form serve? Luis Ferrè-Sadurni answers the question in the negative: it does not serve minorities, nor does it serve the most desperate.

In arguing that historically the policy favored a more middle-class crowd, Sadurni brings primary sources to sway his audience. Reasons for rejecting housing applications included “alcoholism, irregular work history, single motherhood and lack of furniture,” reasons progressives of today, would perceive as morally reprehensible. He sandwiches this note between two photos. Above, an image of well-dressed white woman, waiting in line in 1947 at NYCHA’s office. “When my mother came,” quotes a longtime resident at the Queensbridge houses, “only white people lived here,” he interjects. Followed by the second photo of a prim white girl drying dishes with her smiling white mother. Luis Fèrre-Sadurni is portraying racism as a generational issue. This is also effective because the housing is a family issue more so than an individual issue. Policy began to shift away from blatant discriminations, in the seventies.

Sadurni articulates this shift in a vignette of four smaller photos of both black and white families, of a single woman, mother and daughter, cat grandma and child, and a family. Each of these photos has sufficient lighting, an instrumental element to a nice home. Each of these homes looks furnished. In this moment he is painting a happy picture, as the seventies where the glory days of public housing, the author pines to resurrect.

In order to emphasize this short-lived utopic execution of housing, Luis Ferrè creates an emotional juxtaposition of the seventies against its downfall at the end of the eighties. In broadly addressing housing, often poorer families are condemned to unsafe neighborhoods. In the thriving era of New York city housing, despite the fiscal-crisis and crumbling condition of in the broader city. On duty, NYCHA employed a special unit of police to maintain safety. Additionally, in the spirit of appreciation and gratitude many of NYCHA’s residents volunteered to patrol. Furthering the relationship between youth home, Sadurni selected an image of young black volunteer patrollers, empowered by their ability to contribute. NYCHA’s manager at the time recalls, “If a problem came along there was enough money [to fix it].” Despite the fact that New York was suffering financially, they felt a budget for housing necessary and maintained funding. The thriving NYCHA of the seventies and eighties was overshadowed at the onset of the nineties, during the crack epidemic. This is confirmed by the author of The Last Neighborhood Cops, Gregory Umbach. “As New York falls apart in the nineteen seventies…the housing authority’s projects were anchors of stability and safety…The nineteen eighties is the first time when you’re more at risk of criminal violence on NYCHA property than you are in your surrounding neighborhood.” It is between these two eras that Sadurni poses the four-photo vignette discussed above, of happy families in warm homes. Sadurni incorporates a vivid description by a resident of the projects in Brooklyn to impress upon the reader the severity of the circumstance. L.B. Tillman describes the constant insecurity as follows, “…fights everyday, shootouts everyday…” And Jenkins a resident in Harlem echoes, “Every place you step, you would step on a crack bottle…the [would] get stuck in the groove of your shoe.” Suddenly the reader realizes that the idyllic utopia of public housing was fleeting blip, a cause quickly forsaken.

Sadurni shows that even in modern times, public housing has continued to wane through repeating motifs in his narrative and the emphasis of time’s role in deteriorating the conditions of housing. The author personifies NYCHA as a “victim” of neglect. It succumbs to the accumulating debt of the city which is further exacerbated by Hurricane Sandy in twenty-twelve. In images of cracked paint, of filthy, crowded apartments, of a room heated by just a stove and a child huddled beneath a not-so-warm blanket, Sadurni is translating policy as reality as it impacts the individual. Readers of the New York Times are assumed to be wealthy enough to pay for the subscription; are assumed be able to afford a sufficient blanket. Here, Sadurni is exposing his audience to a lifestyle they would not tolerate and further emphasizing the individual as the helpless “loser” to circumstance. “These building have more than your normal wear and tear.” “They stopped doing preventative maintenance,” admits Gregory Floyd, a representative of NYCHA employees. In choosing to personify NYCHA, Sadurni is articulating the significance of “home.” Home is supposed to be an incubator for a family and a safe haven for the individual.

Sadurni engages his audience’s anticipation through the use of chronology. Until describing the twentieth-first century, the photos Sadurni uses are all black and white, archives from issues of The New York Times, ages old, giving the “olden-day” feel. Suddenly, when he begins discussing the two-thousands, things are real, pain is colored tangible, not a dream and no longer a memory. In color he builds up the expectation of prosperity, in color he unhinges the

expectation. NYCHA is still under funded, it is in dire need of renovation but forgotten by the apathy of politicians, for those with the progressive values but none of the passion. Luis Ferrè-Sadurni wants to stir the passion he wants to reinvigorate his audience of progressives towards their neglected values. He is not seeking to make an intellectual argument, nor does he offer a deep analysis of the why’s and how’s that destroyed NYCHA rather he speaks of the impact. His article is an analysis of the “so-what”. He brings this article in full circle, showing the cycle of suffering, and the apathy towards the “unstable home”. He began graphically describing the homes as concentrated in their faults, “No heat. Leaking roofs. Mold and pests. Interminable waits for basic repair.” These are the inhuman conditions who’s impact he shows in imagery, and quoted experience at the end. A grandmother “…used an open oven to heat the apartment she shares with her grandson Michael this winter.” He ends by a quote from Tino Hernandez, the Chairman at NYCHA, “I’m heartbroken because this is an important resource for poor people in New York City.” But is this Luis Ferre-Sadurni merely quoting, or is he imply a passivity among the players of the game?

Luis Ferre-Sadurni’s article, “The Rise and Fall of New York Public Housing: An Oral History” discusses problems but offers no solution. It is clear that Sadurni values public housing- it is clear that he values people- it is clear that he is antidiscrimination and it is clear that he knows the history he is reporting on. He is successful I gaining emotional backing of his readers, but gives readers no way to channel these feelings. It is unclear what he wants from his readers, who are likely an intelligent, informed and openminded. They are New Yorkers and they want the best for their city, and they want it to stay colorful. Yet, he raises awareness with no inkling of solution. What steps must be taken to equip NYCHA with more funding? Sadurni’s tone is critical but not precise. In the greater discussion of affordable housing, Jenny Schutz, a scholar of

economics, points to zoning as a contemporary issue with racial implications. the worst neighborhoods and ultimately resulting in other forms of housing stress beyond living condition and affordability. These include commute distance, quality of education, safety etc. She also discusses that housing, unlike food and health insurance isn’t a default provision guaranteed to all U.S. citizens. It can be inferred that Sadurni also thinks housing should be a universal right, yet he fails to articulate this, or to even graze this broader debate. Furthermore, at the beginning of his article, Sadurni touches upon the selectivity of affordable housing in NYC but fails to explain its evolution through time. Though these technicalities were not the focus of Sadurni’s tone, and his tone was more informative than a plea for political action, it would have been helpful for him to guide his readers to more resources, perhaps through the use of hyperlinks. Passion without action is futile.

Sadurni builds a perception of New York City’s public housing as the “anti-home.” In curating vivid photographs depicting the circumstance, he brings his readers into the story. Readers believe him because he does not his own voice, but through the voices of those who are “in-it” he merely acts as a narrator tying the story together. These quotes and photographs act as evidence that can hold itself up making the article, “The Rise and Fall of New York Public Housing: An Oral History” tenable. He employs intentional language to further his points from the very beginning. In his title the words, “rise and fall” queue the readers into ultimate disaster that he builds up to. Sadurni’s article is a convincing piece of rhetoric which utilizes a critical tone to inform thoughtful readers, and holding up to their standards in its employment of ethos and pathos. The collaged quality of his article creates a rigorous body of work that tells a difficult story in a compelling way.

Draft 3

Public housing in New York City, run by the New York City Housing Authority (NYCHA), is a system designed to relieve housing-stress on cost-burdened households; those who delegate thirty-percent or more of their annual income on rent. In reality the system of affordable housing has created a mess of problems. NYCHA not only has a history of prejudice, but a blatant apathy towards its clients. Not only has the system created health problems for its residents, but it perpetuates the cycle of poverty. In the New York Times article, “The Rise and Fall of New York Public Housing: An Oral History” Luis Ferrè-Sadurni affectively relays the history of NYC housing policy from the forties until today. In his collage of quotes, photographs, captions, and supplementary text conveying context, he is able to effectively tell the fraught history, capturing his audience with ethos and pathos. Sadurni gains credibility from his readers by using quotes from longtime residents of public housing facilities, managers at New York Housing Authority (NYCHA) and historians. The residents bring the hard and fast reality, the employees explain the intention and ability of NYCHA at a given moment, and the historians bring a breadth of knowledge and expertise. He engages the readers emotionally through evocative language bolstered by photographs. This story, Sadurini is saying, is the story of the individual- a personal pain inflicted by the politically apathetic hand. Sadurini however fails to address a few dimensions of the problems of NYCHA. His collage leaves out the details. Residents of the dilapidated housing units suffer insurmountable stress on a day to day basis. Failure to address the current state of deterioration makes necessary repairs accumulate, causing further economic stress on the city.  Sadurni’s article fails to discuss technicalities, leaving his reader without direction.

To create an emotional saga, the author begins at the creation of NYCHA in 1934 by Mayor Fiorello LaGuardia, as a failed expression of noble values. NYCHA was intended to appeal to brewing liberalism, and the desire for equity. Following an evocative photograph of rubble and ruins against New York’s powerful skyscrapers the author describes the building of the projects as a “slum-clearing machine that reshaped the city,”. The picture portrays the exhibition of public housing as destructive while the words speak of a robotic process that brought drastic and unconsidered change. In hoping to appeal to a critical audience, the author uses the vague terminology, “reshape” begging readers to challenge this “emergent shape.” He hopes they ask themselves, whom does this new form serve? Luis Ferrè-Sadurni answers the question in the negative: it does not serve minorities, nor does it serve the most desperate.

In arguing that historically the policy favored a more middle-class crowd, Sadurni brings primary sources to sway his audience. Reasons for rejecting housing applications included “alcoholism, irregular work history, single motherhood and lack of furniture”; reasons which would be considered morally reprehensible by the progressive movement of today. He sandwiches this note between two photos. Above, an image of well-dressed white woman, waiting in line in 1947 at NYCHA’s office. “When my mother came,” quotes a longtime resident at the Queensbridge houses, “only white people lived here.” Followed by the second photo of a prim white girl drying dishes with her smiling white mother. Luis Fèrre-Sadurni communicating racism’s cyclical nature; racism as an inheritance from parent to child. This is also effective because housing is a family issue as much as an individual issue.  Continuing the motif of family, Sadurni illustrates the shift away from blatant discriminations in the seventies. He employs a vignette of four smaller photos of both black and white families, of a single woman, mother and daughter, cat grandma and child, and a family. Each of these photos has sufficient lighting, an instrumental element to a nice home.  Each of these homes looks furnished. In this moment he is painting a happy picture, as the seventies where the glory days of public housing, the author pines to resurrect.

In order to emphasize this short-lived utopic execution of housing, Luis Ferrè-Sadurni creates an emotional juxtaposition of the seventies against its downfall at the end of the eighties. In broadly addressing housing, often poorer families are condemned to unsafe neighborhoods. Ironically, New York City housing thrived in the seventies despite the fiscal-crisis and crumbling condition of the broader city; during the chaotic times, housing was almost like a sanctuary. NYCHA employed a special unit of police to maintain safety on sites. Additionally, in the spirit of appreciation and gratitude many of NYCHA’s residents volunteered to patrol. Furthering the relationship between youth and home, Sadurni selected an image of young black volunteer patrollers, empowered by their ability to contribute. NYCHA’s manager at the time recalls, “If a problem came along there was enough money [to fix it],” quoted by Sadurni. Despite the fact that New York was suffering financially, they felt a budget for housing necessary and maintained funding. The thriving NYCHA of the seventies and eighties was overshadowed at the onset of the nineties, during the crack epidemic. This is confirmed by the author of The Last Neighborhood Cops, Gregory Umbach. “As New York falls apart in the nineteen seventies…the housing authority’s projects were anchors of stability and safety…The nineteen eighties is the first time when you’re more at risk of criminal violence on NYCHA property than you are in your surrounding neighborhood.” It is between these two eras that Sadurni poses the four-photo vignette discussed above, of happy families in warm homes. Sadurni incorporates a vivid description by a resident of the projects in Brooklyn to impress upon the reader the severity of the circumstance. L.B. Tillman describes the constant insecurity as follows, “…fights everyday, shootouts everyday…” And Jenkins a resident in Harlem echoes, “Every place you step, you would step on a crack bottle…they [crack bottles] [would] get stuck in the groove of your shoe.” Suddenly the reader realizes that the idyllic utopia of public housing was fleeting blip, a cause quickly forsaken.

Sadurni shows that even in modern times, public housing has continued to wane through repeating motifs in his narrative and the emphasis of time’s role in deteriorating the conditions of housing. The author personifies NYCHA as a “victim” of neglect. It succumbs to the accumulating debt of the city which is further exacerbated by Hurricane Sandy in twenty-twelve. In images of cracked paint, of filthy, crowded apartments, of a room heated by just a stove and a child huddled beneath a not-so-warm blanket, Sadurni is translating policy as reality as it impacts the individual. Readers of the New York Times are assumed to be wealthy enough to pay for the subscription; are assumed be able to afford a sufficient blanket. Here, Sadurni is exposing his audience to a lifestyle they would not tolerate and further emphasizing the individual as the helpless “loser” to circumstance.  “These building have more than your normal wear and tear.” “They stopped doing preventative maintenance,” admits Gregory Floyd, a representative of NYCHA employees. In choosing to personify NYCHA, Sadurni is articulating the significance of “home.” Home is supposed to be an incubator for a family and a safe haven for the individual.

Sadurni engages his audience’s anticipation through the use of chronology. Until describing the twentieth-first century, the photos Sadurni uses are all black and white, archives from issues of The New York Times, ages old, giving the “olden-day” feel. Suddenly, when he begins discussing the two-thousands, things are real, pain is colored tangible, not a dream and no longer a memory. In color he builds up the expectation of prosperity, in color he unhinges the expectation. NYCHA is still under funded, it is in dire need of renovation but forgotten by the apathy of politicians, for those with the progressive values but none of the passion. Luis Ferrè-Sadurni wants to stir the passion he wants to reinvigorate his audience of progressives towards their neglected values. He is not seeking to make an intellectual argument, nor does he offer a deep analysis of the why’s and how’s that destroyed NYCHA rather he speaks of the impact. His article is an analysis of the “so-what”. He brings this article in full circle, showing the cycle of suffering, and the apathy towards the “unstable home”. He began graphically describing the homes as concentrated in their faults, “No heat. Leaking roofs. Mold and pests. Interminable waits for basic repair.” These are the inhuman conditions who’s impact he shows in imagery, and quoted experience at the end. A grandmother “…used an open oven to heat the apartment she shares with her grandson Michael this winter.” He ends by a quote from Tino Hernandez, the Chairman at NYCHA, “I’m heartbroken because this is an important resource for poor people in New York City.” But is this Luis Ferrè-Sadurni merely quoting, or is he imply a passivity among the players of the game?

Luis Ferrè-Sadurni’s article, “The Rise and Fall of New York Public Housing: An Oral History” discusses problems but offers no solution. It is clear that Sadurni values public housing- it is clear that he values people- it is clear that he is antidiscrimination and it is clear that he knows the history he is reporting on. He is successful I gaining emotional backing of his readers, but gives readers no way to channel these feelings. It is unclear what he wants from his readers, who are likely an intelligent, informed and openminded. They are New Yorkers and they want the best for their city, and they want it to stay colorful. Yet, he raises awareness with no inkling of solution. They are left wondering what steps must be taken to equip NYCHA with more funding. Sadurni’s tone is critical but not precise. In the greater discussion of affordable housing, Jenny Schutz, a scholar of economics, points to zoning as a contemporary issue with racial implications. the worst neighborhoods and ultimately resulting in other forms of housing stress beyond living condition and affordability. These include commute distance, quality of education, safety etc. She also discusses that housing, unlike food and health insurance isn’t a default provision guaranteed to all U.S. citizens.  It can be inferred that Sadurni also thinks housing should be a universal right, yet he fails to articulate this, or to even graze this broader debate. Furthermore, at the beginning of his article, Sadurni touches upon the selectivity of affordable housing in NYC but fails to explain its evolution through time.  Though these technicalities were not the focus of Sadurni’s tone, and his tone was more informative than a plea for political action, it would have been helpful for him to guide his readers to more resources, perhaps through the use of hyperlinks. Passion without action is futile.

Sadurni builds a perception of New York City’s public housing as the “anti-home.” In curating vivid photographs depicting the circumstance, he brings his readers into the story. Readers believe him because he speaks not through his own voice, but through the voices of those who are “in-it”; he merely acts as a narrator tying the story together. These quotes and photographs act as evidence that can hold itself up making the article, “The Rise and Fall of New York Public Housing: An Oral History” tenable. He employs intentional language to further his points from the very beginning. He even queues his readers into the ultimate disaster in his title through the words, “rise and fall.” Sadurni’s article is a convincing piece of rhetoric which utilizes a critical tone to inform thoughtful readers, and holding up to their standards in its employment of ethos and pathos. The collaged quality of his article creates a rigorous body of work that tells a difficult story in a compelling way. Sadurni’s readers are left painfully aware of failing policy yet powerless without sufficient knowledge to forge a solution.