Introduction
One of the primary reasons for poor living conditions in New York City was increasing rates of immigration after the war of 1812. Because people that arrived in the country did not have sufficient funds and, consequently, could not afford to house, “the tenant-house became a real blessing”. However, this did not last too long. Just like in every market where demand exceeds supply, the quality of housing got worse, whereas the number of people willing to rent a place grew continuously. At first, large rooms were divided into smaller ones with little consideration given to light and ventilation. As demand for housing continued to grow, houses were then converted into barracks, as greater profits could be realized by renting companies and house owners due to large-scale operations even if prices were to be lowered. Houses have been divided into “smaller proportions capable of containing human life within four walls” to degree that even death of a child has been registered “due to suffocation in the foul air of an unventilated apartment”. One room “12 x 19 with five families living in it” was the regular case in New York City. As a result of poor living conditions, the crime rates increased and infectious diseases have been spreading very fast.
The Tenement Housing Act of 1867 was a response to the report on living conditions in tenements presented by the New York Metropolitan Board of Health. Under the principal requirements of this report, every room that was used for sleeping should have had a ventilation system installed unless it directly communicated with the external air. Requirements have been also established for the fire escape, roof and stairs, and cleansing. All cases of infectious diseases should have been reported to the Board of Health and there was a requirement of at least 1 toilet per every 20 people. Even though the Tenement Housing Act of 1867 was not especially effective in resolving the problems with living conditions, it still was significant, since it laid the foundation for all subsequent regulations.
Jacob Riis – photographic and journalistic talent
Jacob Riis has been widely known for his dedication in using his photographic and journalistic talents to address the social concerns that New York City faced. Being one of the first photographers to use flash, he is widely regarded as the pioneer in photography, who not only laid the foundation for movement to improve the living conditions in New York City but also laid the path for professional photographers in this field.
Jacob Riis served as a police reporter in 1877 for the New York Tribune. His work allowed him to be present in the most impoverished slums of the city. Riis decided to bring a difference in this world for those who lacked a voice to be heard. Riis became one of the first photographers in the U.S. to use flash powder, which allowed him to take photos during the nighttime. Specifically, Riis’s photos of Mulberry Street are widely known. Photographs that are included in “How the Other Half Lives” were initially published in Scribner’s Magazine in 1889. Going even further, the works of Riis are known to have convinced then-Commissioner of Police Theodore Roosevelt to shut down the police-run poor houses. About Riis, Roosevelt coined the term “muckraking journalism”, a journalist who laid the path for others to go by own talent and dedication.
In his works, Riis argued for better housing, minimal sanitation, and lighting he favored the construction of parks and playgrounds. Riis encouraged others to taker an active part in developing and shaping their surroundings. Going even further, Riis’s idea inspired Jack London to create a similar work on London’s East End, People of Abyss.
Riis aims to make a change in the society
Riis departs from the perspective that humanity itself is responsible for poor social conditions. If these were the views held by Riis, the work “How the Other Half Lives” would have never been published, as it aims at the opposite of Victorian values and views: Riis aims to make a change in society.
The major reason for poverty is an unequal distribution of income and lack of mobility in moving from one social class to another. As the rich got richer at the expense of those who lack the basic resources, the barrier between the two classes became stronger. Consequently, over time, the low class would become dependent on a higher class that controlled all the basic resources needed for living. Once the vicious cycle of poverty has been started, it would be difficult to break it: being limited in resources, low-income people were not able to afford decent living and education, which lowered the price of their labor in the market made them dependent upon major owners of resources. Given a small number of people controlled the major resources, the scope of the influence of only a few people was large, which means that a large part of the market followed the laws established only by a few major owners of resources. As poverty continues to spread, the living conditions of the lower class get worse, similar to the situation in New York City before the Tenement Housing Act of 1867, when houses were continued to be divided into smaller apartments regardless of the quality of living due to high concentration of the level of control over the market in hands of a few people. His situation could have been avoided if the government were to intervene.
For society to change, a breakthrough is needed for those lacking the basic resources and, at the same time, an effective system of checks and balances for large companies exercising control in the market must be established. On one side, the satisfaction of basic needs and the opportunity to realize oneself in life empowers the lower class and provides equal opportunities for self-actualization. As such, the minimum resources must be given for them to find the stimulus and develop their talents and carrier further for the benefit of themselves and society overall. On the other side of the fence, a checks and balances system is needed to ensure that too much control is not concentrated in one hand. Depending on economic situations in a country at a given point in time, it might be necessary for the government to establish a price ceiling in certain markets to ensure accessibility of resources and basic control over those in power. The government could also establish the minimal norms required for delivery of service or product and in such a way ensure that the interests of the low-income population are protected. Finally, an option could be rooted in a different system of taxation – effective taxation when the rate depends on the level of income. It should be noted, that in such situations effective results can be achieved either through radical measures or through enforcement of legal actions by the government.
Conclusion
If the changes were to be implemented, the quality of life in society would have improved with the low-income population being more protected. At the same time, the rate of crime, infectious disease, and other adverse consequences that follow poverty would also decrease contributing to a more safe environment.