Please respond to each of the following questions in 4-6 sentences per response. Then, respond specifically to at least one of your peers' answers for a total of 6 posts. Remember to explain your answers fully and provide evidence when appropriate.
- Gansburg's article first appeared in 1964-- how do you think the article, and the events it describes, would be received by readers if it were published today? Explain your rationale.
- How would you explain the witnesses' abstention from action in calling the police, based on the evidence in the text and your understanding of human behavior?
- What is Gansburg's purpose in writing the piece and who is his audience? Is he writing towards a bias or opinion? Provide textual evidence.
- What was your initial reaction to the text? What caused that reaction and how did the author's writing technique influence your feelings about the text.
- What effect do the descriptions and dialogue have on the overall message the text delivers? Are there any words, phrases, ideas that stood out to you while reading the text? Explore why they had an impact.
If Gabdurg’s article with the events described were published today people would be horrified and disgusted. Horrified that something so barbaric like this even happened. Disgusted that no one did anything to help this woman. That they just ignored her cries for help. The people who read it would be disbelieving that in today’s time we could just liik away from something like that.
ReplyDeleteThis article appeared in 1964. What effect was it intended to have on its audience? Doyou think it has the same impact today, or has its impact chaned or diminished"
Delete1. If the article and the events that were described in it were publised today, i think it would be recived by readers as a horrific act. I feel this way because now a days when most people hear someone screaming for help they usually will call the police.
ReplyDeleteThis article appeared in 1964. What effect was it intended to have on its audience? Doyou think it has the same impact today, or has its impact chaned or diminished"answer
Delete1. All of America, and perhaps the world, would know of Kitty Genovese, as sensational stories like this spread faster and to a much broader audience with enhanced communication abilities. Were the article published today, it would be received with shock by some, and as proof of the decline of modern society to others. Good Samaritan stories are few and far between nowadays, as the media chooses to cover the more grim side of human behavior. Cynics, being now used to the negative consequences of the ills of humanity would not be shocked by the events, rather it would serve as an affirmation that humanity is at its core senseless, evil, and corrupt.
ReplyDeletePeople don’t ever want to get involved in something they have no stake in. If there is no benefit from the action, some people consider it a worthless endeavor. Many of the neighbors interviewed reported that they did not want to get involved, or that they were too tired to deal with the situation. The neighbors assumed that if they called the police they would have to stay up all night and deal with the problem. They also probably assumed that someone else would step to the plate and call the police; after all, Kitty’s cries for help awoke several people in the neighborhood.
ReplyDelete2. The witness absentee from calling the cops is inexcusable. The claimed that they didn’t call the cops because they were too scared and didn’t want to get involved. I believe that the only reason why people came forth after the cops and they showed up is because, the murder had already happened and because the cops were on scene and knew that the person that had done it was gone.
ReplyDelete1.If this very article appeard in todays paper, I think the reaction would be a much difftrent one . It would be one of those stories that we would see on the news for weeks. People would be in complete shock that a whole building heard kitty Genovese’s cries for help and no one called the police. I’m sure that everyone who heard this story would be very angry at the fact that there would be people today In this day in age that wouldn’t help someone who is desperately asking for it.
ReplyDelete2. The witnesses refraining from calling the police was uncaring and inhuman. One witness admitted to seeing the attack, but was so uncaring that he went back to bed. His excuse was “I was tired.” The behavior of some of these people may have been out of fear but the rest just inhuman.
ReplyDeleteIf this article came out today the public would be outraged. I live in a very rough neighborhood in where people are killed all the time but we never fail on calling the police. Its an awful thing to have in your mind that you could have helped a person live but you let them die. It is inhuman to not care of someones life, just let them be murdered like that, everyone who couldve called should have been charged for the murder also.
ReplyDeleteGansberg’s purpose in writing the text is not only to illuminate the failings of the neighbors in the Kitty Genovese murder. While a reader might insist that if they were in the same situation, they would intervene and phone the police, through his interviews and descriptions of the everyday people involved, Gansberg shows that this lack of action could occur to anyone, in any neighborhood. Gansberg describes the neighbors as people that a reader could identify with, providing details of the neighborhood including an (at the time) average price range for homes where average, run of the mill people lived. Gansberg is not exactly defending the neighbors, but he is not out rightly condemning them either.
ReplyDelete2. Poeple often dont like to get involved in situations like the one in the text because i'm pretty sure that at the moment everyone is sharing the same feeligns. Fear would have to be the biggest emotion, curiosity another. In the peoples mind they are probably thinking that if they do call the police that the killer would somehow find out and come after them next. Other just really don’t want to get involved, If they don’t get involed they don’t get botherd. It’s wrong but its how people think.
ReplyDelete1.In todays world filled with crime and lawsuits the article could just be another examlpe of people minding ther own business. Todays readers see violence on tv’s and movies about people being killed if you tell on someone. If this happened in todays world she might have lived. Someone would have called the cops. The police system is stronger in 2010 than in 1964.
ReplyDeleteTodays readers would react the same way the characters in the story acted. They would be too scared of the person. They will say “ I didn’t know” but you watch the peson get assaulted. You should be punish for just watching. At least call the police. Many people in our socitey are scared of the police or do not like them so they don’t want nothing to to with them.
ReplyDeleteThat reminds me of a quote that was once said by a great man, Martin Luther King Jr. "At the end we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends."
Delete2.Cowardly is the best fitting word for the witnesses abstention from the murder. The man who told the killer to stop the first time could definatley have saved ms. Genovese life if he wasn’t “tired”. Some people feel safer if they stay ou tof a situation. The could have all percived it as an couple arguing.The only problem Is ms. Genovese cried out for help on more than one occasssion so someone shuld have stepped up to the plate.
ReplyDeleteBased on the text everyone was afraid to get involved with the murder. I can kind of understand this because on my block there is a saying that says snitches get stiches. This still isn't a reason why someone didnt call. They could have called annonymous and give no name or address but tell the police about the crime right away.
ReplyDeleteI think that Gransburg wrote this piece for a bias audience against the people who did not do anything to help. Gransburg kept quoting what the people said from the scene of the murder to show how no one really cared that someone they knew was being murdered. A police officer asked a lady from the scene why she had not called the police and she replied “ I don’t know.” Another man who wittnessed the second attack said “ I was tired. I went back to bed.”
ReplyDelete3.Granburg does a good job of showing the surronding enviorment and writes this as an article in the New York Post so his readers are mostly new yorkers. Providing information so the people of the city can see that sometimes being quiet can be deadly. His opion was evident in the text.” I didn't want to get involved," he sheepishly told police.”
ReplyDelete1.If Gansberg article “Thirty-Eight Who Saw Murder Didn’t Call the Police” were to be published today many people wouldn’t be so surprised. Queens is a rough neighborhood and many people don’t speak or help because they are scared for their own life. Of course people do call the police and inform them what happen but only after the fact the crime was done. I stand my grown on this answer because I grew up in the projects and Jersey City Greenville is more than likely to be like any other minority area in New Jersey or in New York. Till this day, many have witness a crime being done, but have taken action only after a person was dead or injured.
ReplyDeleteIn today’s world the news and newpapers are filled with crime stories such as murders, robberies, and assualts. So if this artice was published today it will be just another story in the newspaper. It would still shock the readers with the events that happened such as people witnessing the attack and no one helping or calling the police but most readers wouldn’t view it as such a big deal. Its no surprise to me that no one called or helped because i know people that witnessed crimes and didn’t say anything jus because they didn’t want to get involved with the police. Some people are just scared to get involved thinking that the suspect might come after them, or people in the neighborhood mght view them as a “snitch” if they’re seen talking to the police. The events that took place in the artice still occur in today’s world.
ReplyDeleteThough the article was appeared in 1964, I believe if it were published today, the readers would have respond the same way they did back in 1964. Who wouldn’t be shocked at something like this? Its crazy how people can witness a murder and wont even have the decency to do something about it. I wouldn’t be surprised if it were to happen today. With the people too caught up with their own lives they wont even realize someones being murdered right in front of their house.
ReplyDeleteI have read the Kitty Genovese story several times now, first coming across it in a psychology class as a case study of the by-stander effect. While it is normal to be shocked and even angry at the neighborhood’s lack of action, I cannot say I would do differently. There have been countless times when the shrieks of someone outside have wakened me up in the middle of the night, and I have only bothered to check the window about 30% of the time. Gansberg’s article provides a rational and human voice to the neighborhood. While it does not excuse their actions or evoke any sort of empathy for them, Gansberg is not quick to vilify. He provides an almost unbiased, emotionless re-telling of the events, leaving the reader to question whether or not this could happen to them.
ReplyDeleteHuman beings in general do not want to get hurt by anything or anyone. In the story it seem like they didn’t care and don’t want nothing to do with it. If the samething wasd to happen to one of them they would want help from someone else. The saying goes treat people as you want to be treated. In their case they don’t want help from anyone. Some were afrwaid the attacker might come after them eventually but all they had to do was call the police. It don’t take anytime away from your sleep. People are just mean and cruel.
ReplyDelete1.I feel that people would be more concerned now then when it happened. I do not think kitty would have got murdered if something like that happened today so, readers would have been upset to know that something like this actually happened and no one did anything.
ReplyDelete1. If Gansburg’s 1964 article was published today, I think that it would be received by readers as shocking and very disturbing. In the narrative that we read, it seemed as if the readers in 1964 seemed to brush the incident aside and didn’t seem to have heart-felt feelings about something this serious happening in their own neighborhood. In today’s society with all the technology we have and the resources we have available to us, the readers and the people in the neighborhood would be in shock of why it took two weeks to solve this case. Thirty eight people having witnessed the incident in front of their own apartment buildings and no one called the police, its very disturbing.
ReplyDelete2. To me, the witnesses’ abstention from action in calling the police is very confusing. Thirty-eight people heard screams of “Oh, my God, he stabbed me! Please help me! Please help me” and “I’m dying, I’m dying” and not one single person called the police. They claimed that they did not want to get involved and even one man stated to police, “I was tired,” “I went back to bed.” I think this action that was taken on by the witnesses’ was very selfish; they did not want to help save an innocent woman’s life by making a very simple 911 phone call.
ReplyDelete4.I was shocked, I did not think something like this would happen. The people I live around today in this generation wouldn’t think this would happen either I would hope. Gansburg really caught my attention when he quoted the people from the scene. To actually hear their excuses on why they just let this girl die was surprising.
ReplyDelete2. I would explain the witnesses’s abstention from action in calling the police is that they didn’t want to be involved in that kind of situation. They might endanger their families or their own safety in the process. It was understandable to me because I would have done the same exact thing.human behavior is a very tricky situation. Sometimes we act one way in other situations and another way in another situation.
ReplyDelete3. I believe that Ginsburg’s purpose in writing this article is to let everyone know what really happened that night of Kitty Genovese’s murder. I believe that his audience is anyone and everyone who will read the New York Times. His writing is just giving the information about the incident and the witnesses that night to the public through a news article. I don’t believe that he is purposely trying to blame the incident on the neighbors who did not call the police. I believe that his main purpose was to just be informative and to give everyone the correct story through the words he got from the interview with the Assistant Chief Inspector.
ReplyDeleteBecause Gansberg’s descriptions are not deeply rooted in emotion, the article comes across as very matter-of-factly. There are no embellishments in his writing, no purple prose to illicit a response of shock or horror in the reader- the situation itself is enough. Some of the only detailed descriptions are of what the neighbors were doing when they explained why they did not intervene. The man who phoned a friend before deciding not to get involved, says so “sheepishly”, while the housewife who assumes the cries are of a lover’s quarrel says so “quite casually”. Gansberg brings them out of the darkness of the moniker “thirty-eight who saw murder didn’t call police” and makes them very human and very relatable.
ReplyDelete5.Gransburg decribed the whole senario in details on who, what, where, when, and why.. I felt as if I was there and should have done something to help or thought to myself this is what I would have done. When something is explained in deep detail the reader is acutally able to feel like they are in that story and that they are able to give genuine respnses because they feel as if they havw face that problem or situation.
ReplyDelete1.If gansbergs article were to be published today I think people would be appalled by both the actions of the witnesses and the act itsself. In present day, yes there are people who might act as the witnesses in the article acted but there are also people who would run to the phone and call the police right away if they heard someone scream the words”oh, my God, he stabbed me! Please help me! Please help me!” and “I’m dying!” The fact that there were more than one witness would probably shock the person reading this more because not one of them had it in their mind to pick up a phone. I know when I read this the first thing that went through my mind was “why didn’t they care?” you would think if another person heard someone being stabbed, they would act instead of hiding behind a window watching a woman die a slow death until the man returned again and again until the final blow.
ReplyDelete4. My initial reaction to this text was extreme disbelief and shock. Disbelief, because of the actions taken by the people in the neighborhood that, “just didn’t want to get involved.” The way that Gansburg quoted some of the neighbors and witnesses is what made me be in such disbelief about this article. The complete story line is such a horrific event that happened and for it to be so detailed about the neighbors and Kitty Genovese’s cries for help is what really shocked me. Thirty eight people refused to call the police which is what seems to bother me the most about this article.
ReplyDelete3.Gansburg’s purpose in writing the piece is to let people know what happened to the women. His audience was people who read the newspaper. He was writing towards an opinion. He was writing everything that was told to him by the cops and witnesses.
ReplyDelete1.During 1964 there was a lot of racism and a war that was escalating in Vietnam. According to the article,this situation cause crime rate to rise and more drugs to be exposed.There is no diffent today than when this article was written people are still afraid of getting involved in frantic situations.Everyone,will voice their oppinion about how someone should have step in, but only after the fact.
ReplyDelete4.To think that so many people can live in an area hear a lady cry for help and not do anything is appauling. No one really knows what they would do in that situation. If they really did not want to physically attempt to help Ms. Genovese then a phone call to the police should have been the minimun of the witnesses actions that night. Gangsberg informed the readers about her parking spot and the warning she had about parking where she usually parked. The fact that he kept coming back to finish the job and no one could help even when he drove off.
ReplyDelete3. Gansburg's purpose to writing the text was to inform everyone on how the neighborhood could have helped poor Ms Genovese live. It's his opinion on how the people witnessing the murder should have called the police right away after the first cry of help and stabbing. This article was meant for everyone to read and see how society sometimes is inhuman. In his text he includes interviews, and some of the things that the people said like being to "tired" was not right at all.
ReplyDelete5. While reading this article the dialogue and description that was used seemed to make the overall message more disturbing and upsetting. The dialogue that was used when referring to the comments that the neighbors and witnesses’ made was extremely upsetting. “I was tired,” “I went back to bed,” were the most disturbing phrases in the whole text. The effect overall of the description and dialogue, in my opinion made this article more shocking and sad to anyone who came across it.
ReplyDelete2. How would you explain the witnesses' abstention from action in calling the police, based on the evidence in the text and your understanding of human behavior?
ReplyDeleteA couple of individuals stated that they, “didn’t want to get involved.” I believe some people may have heard the commotion outside their houses and thought it was a domestic dispute rather than a stranger stabbing a defenseless woman, therefore did not call the police. Domestic violence is still violence and should not be tolerated however some people have a mind frame of, “its none of my business.” One man yelled out the window, “leave that girl alone.” I assume that man had no idea what was going on outside or else I would hope he would do more than just yell outside to stop.
3. What is Gansburg's purpose in writing the piece and who is his audience? Is he writing towards a bias or opinion? Provide textual evidence.
ReplyDeleteI believe that Gansburg’s reason for writing the article is to tell this woman’s story and open peoples eyes that it is everyone’s business and we do need to get involved. I think his audience is anyone who will pick up the paper and read it. The detective who says, “A phone call would have done it.” If one of the 38 people who either saw or heard something would have called the police they would respond within minutes. I believe that he made his point by stating the facts of what happened that night, and everyones response to why they didn’t react in any way. From the couple who turned on their light and when asked why they didn’t call the police she said, “I don’t know.” And man who cracked his door open to give his statement of what he saw and said, “I was tired, I went back to bed.”
His purpose for writing this is to imform people to speak out against crime. People think if they tell on the person that others will hate them forever. Let them hat you. You are protecting another human life or you are preventing antoher one from happening. Think about you can be a hero to someone and nkot even know. In todays world telling on somone will get you killed so no one tells or calls the cops when they see something happening.
ReplyDelete4. What was your initial reaction to the text? What caused that reaction and how did the author's writing technique influence your feelings about the text.
ReplyDeleteI was shocked that 38 people heard some sort of disturbance outside their house and did nothing about it. Just by stating the facts of the story and how people responded to the situation makes me think, what the hell. The story also makes me a little angry/upset. Those emotions were evoked by the words the author used to describe the witnesses responses to why they did nothing. “I didn’t want to get involved,” he sheepishly told the police.” “I was tired,” he said without emotion. Really? Your neighbor was just murdered outside your house and this man couldn’t do anything because he was tired?
4. My initial reaction to the text was socked, horrified, disbelieving, and disgusted. The fact that anyone could just ignore someone cries for help is fritting. That they could look at what was happing and just look away? What were these people thinking? What went throw their heads as they listened to that woman screams. I don’t think author’s writing technique influence me, but I could me wron.
ReplyDelete5. What effect do the descriptions and dialogue have on the overall message the text delivers? Are there any words, phrases, ideas that stood out to you while reading the text? Explore why they had an impact.
ReplyDeleteThe descriptions of what took place that evening and the way the author describes the witnesses response to the police has a profound impact on the articles purpose and message. For me it is the way the neighbors repond to questions of why no one called the police, “I didn’t want to get involved,” he sheepishly told the police.” “I was tired,” he said without emotion.
4. My initial reaction to the text was, I can’t believe that all these people heard this women scream out for help and didn’t do anything about it. The reason I reacted this way was, after the crime had happened and the police were on scene everybody wanted to come forward. Some were saying they thought it was a husband and wife fighting, others stated they didn’t want to get involved, and one said he didn’t call the police because he was tired but, once the police had showed up everybody had something to say about it.
ReplyDelete4. It was an awful thing not to call the police, but in today's society people are afraid to get involved with murders or killers. There have been times where people get shot in the face and the murderer has never been found. So i guesse this brings fear into people that if they tell they will be shot also. The way Gansburg wrote this articule should have made the people who witness the murder feel guilt. But as you can see in the text they didnt really care, which influenced my responses.
ReplyDelete5.The the dialouge eximplified the cowardness of everyone that saw the muder take place. A man peeked out from a slight opening in the doorway to his apartment and rattled off an account of the killer's second attack. Why hadn't he called the police at the time? "I was tired," he said without emotion. "I went back to bed." That showed that even though the man knew something bad was happening he had no type of conncern for that young woman. This took the bigest blow to my mind because how can u tell police you saw it but you cannot explain why they didn’t recive a call.
ReplyDelete2.The witnesses abstention would be explained as a cowardly act. Based on the fact that they were safe in their houses as the act took place and the fact that they watched this poor woman die and get carried away before acting makes them cowrads. It disgusts me how a man could say without emotion that he was tired so he went to bed. Based on their actions I would say that the blame for her murder could be placed on them as well.
ReplyDelete2. Based on the evidence in the text I would explain the wintesses’ abstention from action in calling the police as being selfish. The first witness who yelled out the window “let her go” could of easily called the police or ran downtstairs and helped Ms. Genvoese but instead he just went back to bed. One little phone call could of saved Ms.Genvoese but the people of that neighborhood are just selfish and care about them selves. They were only worried about not getting involved with the police and not thinking to them selves that they could of saved a life. If they were to switch positions with Ms. Genvoese they would have wanted somebody to help in any type of way.
ReplyDelete2 The witness that was reported in the article seem a little bite strange to me.The article mentions how he yeild out to the victim but than went back to doing whatever it was that he was doing.He took the time to ask someone in another state to help him make the decission on wheather or not to notify the police.that's a clear sign that he cant think for hisself.Maybe he was on the drugs that was fastly growing.
ReplyDeleteMy reaction was anger towards those individuals that said I was tired or I don’t know why I didn’t call the police. I wanted to jump into the story and do some physcal damage to those people. They didn’t have any feelings for the woman. The replies of the people just made me angry as I kept reading. I wanted to stop reading but had to finish for the class.
ReplyDeleteWell in todays society I'm pretty sure the readers would have been ashamed of the people back then because they let the murder go on fot too long. Other readers might be angry at the fact on how irresponsible the people of 1964 were. I for one am ashamed because it was so easy to get in contact with the police and prevent two other murders but the people didnt do anything they let it happen probably because they fear for there own safety.
ReplyDeleteThe way the night was described and how people had responded to the attack, and how people came forward after the police had arrived was disgusting and horrible. They had a big impact on what I read. For me it was how the neighbors had stated “I don’t want to get involved” or “I’m too tired”
ReplyDelete2. How would you explain the witnesses' abstention from action in calling the police, based on the evidence in the text and your understanding of human behavior?
ReplyDeleteThe witnesses acted cowardly by not calling the police. It was a very selfish act they only thought about themselves and their safety rather than the poor woman that was being slaughtered right before their eyes. People tend to hold back a lot, and yes depending on situations they may be right. But when it comes to the well being of another you should never hold back, there are ways to protect yourselves but still help the victim. It’s better to call and not say who it is rather then live life knowing you didn’t help someone innocent at their time of need.
It explain how people in general don’t care and are to scared to say anything. One reply that stood out to me was “ I don’t know” they don’t know why they didn’t call police. Your first reaction when you hear a scream like that during the night is to call the police. You don’t have to go out there but pick the phone up and dial numbers. That does not hurt to do.
ReplyDelete1. Gansburg’s article first appeared in 1964-- how do you think the article, and the events it describes, would be received by readers if it were published today? Explain your rationale.
ReplyDeleteIn today’s time I believe people would be still be shocked if something like that happened. But unfortunately like back then I’m sure people would still keep their distance. It’s sad but true people tend to stay away from problems especially when there not their own. It’s also known that depending on time of the day, appearance of the person in the situation, race and so on give an effect on the outcome of if someone would help. On who would help and what they’d actually to do help.
3.The purpose of gansburg to write this piece is to show how the world was becoming more violent and uncaring than ever before. I think he is writing towards a bias because he focused way too much on the police . it was not their fault that the citizens didn’t want to call them. How would the cops know that someone needs help if they never call them in the first place? That’s like saying you blame the fireman for never putting out the fire if you or nobody never called
ReplyDeleteIn response to Catherine’s post
ReplyDeleteGansberg’s purpose in writing the text is not only to illuminate the failings of the neighbors in the Kitty Genovese murder. While a reader might insist that if they were in the same situation, they would intervene and phone the police, through his interviews and descriptions of the everyday people involved, Gansberg shows that this lack of action could occur to anyone, in any neighborhood. Gansberg describes the neighbors as people that a reader could identify with, providing details of the neighborhood including an (at the time) average price range for homes where average, run of the mill people lived. Gansberg is not exactly defending the neighbors, but he is not out rightly condemning them either.
I completely agree with Catherine’s statement in the sense where she states that Gansberg is not defending any of the neighbors, yet he is not condemning them for their actions either. I feel that after reading the article fully and collecting my thoughts about the article and its intended meaning, I came across the same opinion as Catherine. The way Gansberg presented this article and the form of writing he used made his purpose clear to me, that he is not blaming anyone or defending anyone.
4.My initial reaction to the text was very surprisng. It was like the author was trying to stir up different kinds of emotions in me or something like that. He tried to make the reader feel what the vicim felt when she was getting stabbed. It seems like the author also tried to make me feel bad for kitty like I had something to do with it.
ReplyDeleteIn the text it explained how easy it was to inform the police, but no one ever contacted them. I think it was fear that kept the citizen from contacting the cops. Usually fear is something that keeps people from doing somthing. Since the people didnt want to die they didn't contact the police. They thought about themselves and that's the reason why they were neglectful in contacting them.
ReplyDelete4. What was your initial reaction to the text? What caused that reaction and how did the author's writing technique influence your feelings about the text.
ReplyDeleteI felt really bad that people would actually just sit there and watch something like that happen. The way the author says people would put their lights on to see what’s going on and then just simply shut them off disgusted me. It was as if nothing was happening since I guess it wasn’t towards them, I’m sure if it was them in that situation they’d also yell and hope for help from others. It bothered me how inconsiderate people can truly be when their “scared”.
1.If the article was published today, I think the readers would be less surprised than back then in the 1960’s where stuff like this didn’t happen that often. In today’s world, events like this is not unusual anymore because don’t want to get involved out of being caught in the situation. That is perfectly understandable. Some people may have a different perspective on what happened.personally, if something like this happened today,I wouldn’t be surprised much. The news reporters would be all over it.
ReplyDelete3.The reason for Gansberg written this article is for people to feel reasponsible for helping other who are in danger.Refering back to the article it focus a lot on all the people who reside in the neigborhood.This was an bias story.the reporter was really trying to figure out the reason why no one got involved.
ReplyDelete3. What is Gansburg's purpose in writing the piece and who is his audience? Is he writing towards a bias or opinion? Provide textual evidence.
ReplyDeleteI think Gansburg’s intentions were to teach the audience which in my opinion would be the neighbors of that cold gruesome day and any other citizen reading his story. It was more an opinion then bias for the simple fact that he states if people would have called the police at the first instant she might still be alive today.
I'm pretty sure he was writing towards an opinion audience. I say this because in the story the author keeps asking why the people didn't call the cops. Especially when there were thirty-eight witnesses. The purpose in the author writing this is to see what opinions people come up for the reason didnt call the police.
ReplyDelete4. My reaction to the text was that i felt hurt for this woman. I wept for her in this day in time.I wonder how could those people could of been so heartless all it took was a simple call to the police.This should have been prevented.The writter really mad it more harsh by explaining how many time the murder came back.
ReplyDeleteMy initial reaction to the text was "why isn't anyone doing anything? Are they dumb?". I say this because the killer had to return three times to try to finish her off. On the second time he returned someone yelled out "Leave her alone!" still he didn't do anything and left the problem alone. His technique in showing the people negiligence of a cry for help from a woman, and how they responded to the cry.
ReplyDelete5. What effect do the descriptions and dialogue have on the overall message the text delivers? Are there any words, phrases, ideas that stood out to you while reading the text? Explore why they had an impact.
ReplyDeleteThe descriptions show that people are truly uncaring and heartless, how can so many people live in a town and hear a woman yelling in the street, basically saying she’s being stabbed at the crack of dawn and still do nothing! The dialogue just proves their selfishness how people said they were just to scared, or a woman said she didn’t want her husband involved I’m sure if it was her she’d ask for help to. Another man says he was simply tired, what the hell is that? Okay I won’t call the cops at least to save your life because I’m missing out on 3minutes of sleep, that’s ridiculous. People are so careless.
5.The fact that the killer was able to be identify bothers me.Sentence 13 state that a man called out,"leave that girl alone".Another problem that i have is that lights in the apartments was going on and off.The victim begging for her life and no one bother to come to her rescue.People can tell the difference between a lovers fight and someone being murder.
ReplyDeleteThe effect it had on the overall text was that people dont care for anyone else but themselves. There were a couple words and phrases that stood out one was "why didn't anyone call the police" this stood out because while reading the text I asked myself the same question over and over again. The other phrase i saw while reading was "I don't know" or "I was tired" when the police question why they didnt call. this one really bothered me because either they couldn't give a reason on why they didn't do anything when they obviously they couldn't admit they were scared or for the phrases "i was tired" He didn't care about the problem and just let it resolve itself when he could have saved a life.
ReplyDelete3.When Gansburg wrote this article I think the purpose was just to inform people of the incident and maybe to show how cruel this world can be. I don’t think he has a specific audience so it is probably aimed at anyone who is reading the New York Times. In the article I don’t think he is voicing an opinion I think it was just an showing people how the witnesses reacted to the murder of kitty Genovese and how easy it would have been to save her life. Overall the article in my opinion was informative based on the interviews and details on the incident.
ReplyDelete4.When I read the text I honestly felt my anger appear. The cause to my reaction was the idiotic neighbors and the fact that this man was so set on ending this womans life that he came to her three times. I know if I was one of those neighbors I would have dialed 9-1-1 right away because a man who is sick enough to walk away and return to the job repeatedly till she wasn’t breathing is disgusting and I feel he deserved to rot in prison if not in a mental facility. His way of including the interviews and the witnesses actions while speaking made me feel even more anger and sadness toward the situation.
ReplyDelete1.)I believe that if this article was published today there would be arising questions and even animosity toward the 38 people who saw and didn’t do anything about it. There would probably be violent outbreaks of riots to the 38 people who carelessly watched this young woman die.
ReplyDelete2.) I would say that their feelings for this woman, seeing as to how they watched her be murdered reflects the cruel but frightening connotation of human nature to flee the scene before helping an individual in need.
3.) Gangsburg’s audience is the 38 people. He reveals this by taking the spotlight off the victim and on to the 38 people; almost like a reflection for them to show them how cold hearted they were about this incident. He gives evidence in the text by writing about one man’s reaction to a police officer or reporter that he was tired.
4.) When I read the text I felt the pain from the young lady as she was dying 38 people watched it as if it were her death sentence for her “evil deeds .“ I was infuriated with how her life ended I felt justice should have been executed amongst the 38 witnesses
5.) When the police officer asked a resident of the apartment building why didn’t you call the police and he answered, “I was tired” that had a huge impact on me. I could feel how stoically his words were not a care in the world; Cold, harsh, jagged edge knife piercing my heart. The way I see it he should have assisted the killer in putting the knife in her back.
1.) I believe that if this article was published today there would be arising questions and even animosity toward the 38 people who saw and didn’t do anything about it. There would probably be violent outbreaks of riots to the 38 people who carelessly watched this young woman die.
ReplyDelete2.) I would say that their feelings for this woman, seeing as to how they watched her be murdered reflects the cruel but frightening connotation of human nature to flee the scene before helping an individual in need.
3.) Gangsburg’s audience is the 38 people. He reveals this by taking the spotlight off the victim and on to the 38 people; almost like a reflection for them to show them how cold hearted they were about this incident. He gives evidence in the text by writing about one man’s reaction to a police officer or reporter that he was tired.
4.) When I read the text I felt the pain from the young lady as she was dying 38 people watched it as if it were her death sentence for her “evil deeds .“ I was infuriated with how her life ended I felt justice should have been executed amongst the 38 witnesses
5.) When the police officer asked a resident of the apartment building why didn’t you call the police and he answered, “I was tired” that had a huge impact on me. I could feel how stoically his words were not a care in the world; Cold, harsh, jagged edge knife piercing my heart. The way I see it he should have assisted the killer in putting the knife in her back.
5. The effect the description and dialogue that was used in the article seemed to make the overall message more disturbing. “I was tired,” “I went back to bed,” stood out to me the most while reading. They made an impact on me because they were heartless and uncaring. To say such a thing and use it as an excuse to ignore a women’s cry for help is…
ReplyDelete3. Gansburg’s purpose foe writing this piece was I believe to inform and shock the readers. His audience is everyone who reads the New York Tim. If I have to say what he was writing towards I would have to say he was writing toward opinion. He wrote what was told to him. For example the witness who said “I didn't want to get involved”
ReplyDelete