Nickel and Dimed Critique

In this critique I have found on Nickel and Dimmed taken from the New York Post a very popular source for reviews in America, in the first few sentences I have realised that this woman is a very powerful person, someone who would make something out of nothing with the very little she had. The title of the review is, appropriately called 'Making Ends Meet'.

She was earning no more than £7-8 an hour which was considered not a living wage.

The review states that Ehrenreich, even though she had very little, what ever she did she said she is just doing what any other person would do: find work, do the job and get paid for it. She was a divorced homemaker making ends meet.

She describes what her co- workers living conditions were like, with four co-workers living in a two- bedroom flat. She says she had to travel a 45 minute journey to work everyday on the highway. This to me shows that she was determined to work hard for things in life, no matter what.

In the review she gives what seems to be tips on how to survive on a low budget- especially focusing on how and where to eat.

She refers to the surrounding living conditions as difficult and an actual misery. Her hours are eventually cut down at her job s she decides to get a second job which now means she is working a 14 hour day.

What I like about this review is that the writer thanks the author of the book for giving readers an isight to her life and how she coped in such poor conditions and gave advice on how to survive.

Critique

Nickel and Dimed

http://brothersjudd.com/index.cfm/fuseaction/reviews.detail/book_id/5/Nickel%20and%20D.htm

The review which i found from ‘Brothers Judd’ is very critical on Barbara Ehrenreich’s Nickel and Dimed. The review firstly states “we find out much about Barbara Ehrenreich, fairly little about the difficult lives of people she worked with, and nearly nothing about what she would suggest we do to make their lives easier.” This i believe to be true, as despite a few short stories about Ehrereich’s co-workers we fail to gain any in depth insight into the lives of those actually living this lifestyle. I feel the novel would have been enhanced if she had more of a focus on the life’s of the people living in these conditions, if she had become more involved out of the work environment she could have gained further perspective on low-wage USA.

Brothers Judd criticise Ehrenreich as she enters in to her experiment alone this as the review says “makes her character in the book completely unrealistic and leaves her to spend all her time fixating on herself.” If Ehrenreich was to actually live this life she is forgetting that the majority of people in this situation have others to care for and provide for so her experiment is flawed in this sense.

The review would seem to take a religious slant on events, Ehrereich’s dismissal of religion and the church ‘At one point she actually goes to a revival meeting, but it turns out she's only there to make fun of the service’ there is another occasion when the church is offered as a point of refuge and help, but Ehrenreich never acts on this. The idea of religion being a way out, comments on society in the sense that assistance and help is given to those that choose God and religion. On the other hand it could merely be that it is part of their religious beliefs to help others so it is no surprise that help is given through the church.

Another review like the Brothers Judd criticizes Ehrenreich’s experiment. http://www.pajiba.com/book_reviews/nickel-and-dimed-review.php they look to question who the book is aimed at, the review states “You had to read a book about some rich white lady’s experience to learn that some people end up staying in motel rooms that cost twice as much as an apartment, because they can’t scrape together the money for a deposit?” this questioning peoples lack of knowledge and understanding shows American societies failure to address these issues.

The review does defend Ehrenreich in saying that the “book does not mimic what it is actually like to live in poverty” and Ehrenreich stated this from the beginning. However if this is the case what is the point in the experiment if only for Ehrenreich to know that she can live this way! Despite not forming any strong attachment to the people with whom she worked with, she did however as the review says learn how “various employers screw over their employees”

Overall the novel did perform a critical commentary on American society, and how it has failed to recognise many of the housing issues that people working low wage jobs find. The book however like the reviews say was to largely centred around Barbara Ehrenreich making her the centre when the actual people in this situation could give a better insight.

Nickel and Dimed Critique Analysis

I quite enjoyed the book Nickel and Dimed by Barbara Ehrenreich, which encouraged me to compare my thoughts with contrasting ones. The review I found, located at http://brothersjudd.com/index.cfm/fuseaction/reviews.detail/book_id/5/Nickel%20and%20D.htm seemed like the perfect source to do this. The review is extremely opinionated, which I would usually criticise, but the writer of this particular piece does a fantastic job of justifying his largely negative responses to the themes and ideas presented in Nickel and Dimed. Although the criticism is well justified and thought out, the political bias is so strong that it occasionally drifts form the point and becomes an attack at left wing Politics. For example, after presenting an intelligent set of ideas concerning the self-indulgent nature of Ehrenreich, which I will come on to, the writer irrelevantly states how 'this is really the key understanding to why both Marxism and Welfare failed'. This leads us to believe that the writer may be more interested in exposes the problems of left wing Politics than analysing the book. This is particularly recognisable in the last three sections of the review where the writer rants about Politics and even offers his own 4 step plan to solve the economic problems! This arguably leads to the views losing their substance.

As I have previously mentioned, the self-indulgent nature of Ehrenreich narrative is frequently addressed by the writer. Before reading the review I hadn't identified this, but after reading it I don't understand how I didn't. It is explained that, in the text, 'all we are left with is Ehrenreich. Ehrenreich at work or Ehrenreich in a hotel room. The rest of the working poor are merely a backdrop.' This idea is extended and backed up when the writer continues, pointing out that, in reference to the poor in America, Ehrenreich 'doesn't participate in their lives, neither individually by visiting their homes or having them over, nor communally by doing the types of things they do in their off hours'. This suggests that we are presented, by reading the both, with an incomplete interpretation of working class life in various areas of the USA. It isn't centered around the people Ehrenreich is working with. Instead it centers around her experience, meaning that perhaps we don't gain a true first hand view of the situation, as a result of a lack of deep interaction with those around her on Ehrenreich's behalf.

Another real flaw that is pointed out by the writer is the lack of opportunities taken by or referenced by Ehrenreich. This is first highlighted in the review by the reference of her ignorance during the one time she spends any real off-the-clock time with anyone. The writer explains how the outstanding piece of advice given to Ehrenreich, "Always find a Church", by the woman, who has actually experienced life in the American working class with children and a bad string of jobs, is ignorantly ignored. The one time she does attend a church revival service 'she's only there to make fun of the service'. These points lead us to believe that Ehrenreich's complaints about the lack of opportunities for the poor are unjustified. It also, once again, brings up the idea that perhaps Ehrenreich isn't getting the accurate experience of working class life that she claims. This can be supported by the fact that, in the introduction of the book, she spends a page talking about all of the things she won't be taking part in, which could enhance her experience.

It isn't fair for us to label Ehrenreich's efforts as fruitless or unsubstantial, as her work gives us a real insight into the working class situation broadly. However, in order to obtain an in-depth, personal idea of what it was like, Ehrenreich should have spent less time talking about her money struggles and her difficulties with work load, and more time speaking to those people that have had to deal with the situations she is facing every day. With this in mind, it is evident that the explorative journalistic method Ehrenreich had in mind, something she made clear as early as the first and second pages, hasn't been fully achieved.

Nickel and Dimed Critique

http://www.democraticunderground.com/books/01/nickel.html

Democraticunderground.com’s review of Nickel and Dimed mirrored my own thoughts on the book. The review starts: “I no longer see motels the same way since reading Barbara Ehrenreich’s new book, Nickel and Dimed: On (Not) Getting By in America.”, something that I particularly agreed with. Socially and generally, motels are associated with “a place to rest your head between bouts of driving”, like the review says, as well as with horror films such as Psycho; they are not typically seen as places where people stay for more than “two nights”, let alone actually live.

Interestingly, deomcraticunderground.com talks about the things that the middle class “take for granted”, such as: “housing, food, gas”; and while this may be true, I felt as though the critic thought that all middle class people existed in a vacuum, where in reality, these middle class people probably went to college (university) getting an education that would allow for them to have higher paid jobs, and the advantage of taking some things, like food, for granted. This was another point I found interesting about Nickel and Dimed. Barbara Ehrenreich, never explicated explained the reasons for her co-workers, or people in low paid labour jobs, having those jobs in the first place. Something that struck me when reading, was in ‘Scrubbing in Maine’, when Ehrenreich was working for the maid service she mentions how Holly usually asks for the spelling of words like; “carry” and “weighed”, suggesting that Holly did not get an education, and so to some extent it could be argued that it’s her fault for having the job that she has. This is further supported by Ehrenreich saying that she would not include any of her qualifications, suggesting that the types of people, who work in low paid labour jobs, do not have qualifications. I also think that the fact that employers are having to ask questions such as; “It's sometimes okay to come to work high” and that they have become “routine” also suggest the kinds of people that are having these kinds of jobs.

However, it is unsurprising that democraticunderground.com would have taken an interest in Nickel and Dimed and found it “thought provoking”. This is because, firstly, the name of the website implies a left-wing, equal opportunity approach; and secondly, because at the side there is an icon saying: “TOP TEN CONSERVATIVE IDIOTS” and it could be inferred that they perhaps blame the poor conditions of the people that Ehrenreich had to work with, on them [the conservatives], or at least feel like the conservatives are not helping to increase standard of living.

Native American Task

For this blog task I chose the Native American Tribe called the Cherokees. This is their official website:

http://www.cherokee.org/

The Cherokees are best associated with The Trail Of Tears (1836-1839) which is now widely seen by modern historians as a massacre of the Cherokee people and it is hard to excuse the actions of the US government. The Cherokee had been living in the area now called Georgia, with their own laws and customs, but in 1828, when gold was discovered on Cherokee lands, the treaties that existed between the US state and the Cherokee nation were ruled null and void, making the Cherokee claim to the land worthless. This was contested by the Cherokee as far as the Supreme Court in the case of Worchester V Georgia, but Chief Justice John Marshall ruled against them and they lost the case. The Cherokee were forced to sign the Treaty of New Echota as part of the Indian Removal Act. Encouraged by President Jackson, the people of Georgia drove the Cherokee at gunpoint on a thousand-mile trek across the Mississippi. A quarter of them died on a journey that has become known as the “Trail of Tears”. This was not just an act of the US government but all the white population. It appeared no-one truly cared about the well-being of the Native Americans because, for the colonists, the end justified the means. Jackson had felt done the right thing. “The philanthropist …. will rejoice that the remnant of that ill-fated race has been at length placed beyond the reach of injury and oppression, and that the paternal care of the general government will hereafter watch over them and protect them.” (The Mammoth Book of Native Americans) He thought that, by moving the tribes away from white settlers, it would be better for both whites and Native Americans in the long run. Forced expulsions were a common feature of the treatment of Native American tribes by US authorities in the 18th and 19th century.

The Sioux Tribe Aka The Lakota Tribe and Sitting Bull

In this blog I chose to write about the Sioux tribe aka the Lakota Tribe, whose chief or leader is known to many of us as Sitting bull.

The name Sioux, signifies 'snake,' 'adder,' and, by metaphor, 'enemy.' The Hunkpapa formed in the 1700s after a battle in the south. They were the last tribe to go to the reservations. Sitting Bull was a Lakota Sioux.

Sitting Bull was killed Dec.15th 1890 by Indian agency Police,The tribe later lost their identity and stopped being known as the Hunkpapa as they were so few of them and were just know as Lakota Sioux.

Unfortunately due to the tribe slowly disintegrating now there is not much information on the Hunkpapa Tribe so I will talk about their chief, Sitting Bull and the Lakota Tribe.

Lakota Tribe

The Lakota Tribe is situated in the North par of the United States.

Today there are only 70,000 Lakota Indians located now. The majority of Lakota Indians reside in one of five reservations situated in the Dakota's.

The Lakota Indians are governed by their own set of laws. The tribal group has a separate political system and education system.

Sitting Bull

Sitting Bull was born in 1831 in south Dakota, he is best known as The Lakota chief who beat General Custer at Little Bighorn

As mentioned before Sitting bull was killed on December 15th 1890 by Indian Agency police.

Sitting Bull, the Lakota Medicine Man and Chief was considered the last Sioux to surrender to the U.S. Government. He was considered a very powerful man to his tribe. To other they were considered the enemy and to them selves the were "the Lakota".

Info about Sioux http://www.accessgenealogy.com/native/tribes/siouan/hunkpapahist.htm

Lakota reservations map http://www.snowwowl.com/peoplesioux.html

Sitting bull: http://www.powersource.com/gallery/people/sittbull.html

Red Cliff Band of Lake Superior Chippewa

http://redcliff-nsn.gov/Heritage&Culture/heritage.htm

The website which I chose is devoted to the heritage of The Red Cliff. The website explains how “the Red Cliff Reservation was created through a series of treaties between the U.S. Government and the Red Cliff Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians (Red Cliff Band), the most recent being the treaty of 1854.” The reservation on which the Native Americans of the Red Cliff Band are located at is “Bayfield Peninsula, on the shores of Lake Superior in northern Wisconsin.” The population size of the reservation is around 924 of primarily naive Americans.

The history of the Red cliff band is that in 1854 the Commissioner of Indian Affairs wanted the Chippewa Indians to give up their titles on their land on Lake Superior, this called for a treaty in which several Ojibwe chiefs, from which the Red Cliff band derives from were involved in the signing of it. Despite mentioning the treaty the website fails to go in to any great detail, so after further research I discovered the agreements of the Treaty of La Pointe http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_La_Pointe the map clearly shows the “land cession area” despite seding their land tribes still retain hunting, fishing and gathering rights on for this region.

Through the establishment of a tribe council theses rights and well being of the tribe are protected. Their mission statement is to “promote, plan and provide for the health, welfare, education, environmental protection, cultural preservation and economic well being of Tribal Members and to protect Treaty Rights now and in the future." The origins and history of the Red Cliff Tribal Council are explained, this idea of a council shows the tribes conformity to US government regulations and like the cession of their land the control of the US over Native American tribes is shown.

The Red cliff tribe are seen to have strong values on education as shown on the website. Within the website there is a direct link to Bayfield School which is named “best small school in Wisconsin.” Within the constitution and bylaws of the government it states that “We the members of the Red Cliff Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians in the State of Wisconsin, in order to re-establish our tribal organization; to conserve our tribal property; to develop our common resources; to promote the welfare of ourselves and our descendants; to form business and other organizations; to enjoy certain rights of home rule; and to provide for our people education in vocational and trade schools and institutions of higher learning, do ordain and establish this constitution and by-laws.” This showing that they are going against many of the stereotypes that Native Americans posses and are prosperous and despite maintaining their tradition heritage they want to embrace Americas strong values on work and education.