Alice Neel (1900-1984) was one of the greatest portraitists and most remarkable women in 20th century American art. She was outspoken and honest about the lives of disadvantaged people throughout her career. This painting is from 1935, entitled Investigation of Poverty at the Russell Sage Foundation. At the time, the Foundation was a social services organization founded in 1907 by Margaret Olivia Sage. Its mission was “a permanent contribution to the improvement of living and social conditions by its studies and its wide cooperation with agencies, rather than by contributing directly to relief.” In the painting, the grief-stricken woman at the center – who was living with her seven children in an overturned car – is observed with great concern by social workers, academics, and even clergy.
Poverty has been "studied" for many decades, alongside real efforts to alleviate it. How does Neel encourage you to think about the contrast between "studying poverty" and "doing something to end poverty"? As a student and an eventual family professional, how do you think the study of poverty is related to action to end poverty? What role does a sociological imagination play in bridging study and action?
51 comments:
The contrast between studying poverty and doing something to end poverty is the ability to “put yourself in someone else’s shoes” I believe Neel has encouraged me to first study what exactly poverty is and how poverty has effected people by imagining the poverty and recognizing the ability that I can contribute to put an end to poverty. As a future family professional sociological imagination plays a huge role in the relation between studying poverty and the actions that are taken to end poverty. In order to provide a plan to end poverty I must imagine the physical, emotional, intellectual and cognitive levels of all people that are facing poverty today. This includes cross-sectional studies, where I as a future family professional should investigate a group of people of all different ages and study there conditions. This will allow me to imagine their feelings and conditions and “put myself in their shoes.” After I have investigated the studies of poverty and understand people that are suffering from poverty I will be able to contribute to put poverty to an end. As an admirer of Alice Neel she has taught me that poverty can be recognized all around us whether it is in a painting or across the street in a dark alley, but the contribution to the end of poverty only follows if one imagines the conditions of people facing poverty today. The way we change poverty is first by imagining and the way we end poverty is contributing to society.
When asked these questions, the phrase ‘actions speak louder than words’ comes to my mind. While I think it is important to study poverty and the social and economic factors that are attributed to it, the only way to do something about it is to physically make a difference. I think the purpose of Neel’s portrait is to raise awareness that poverty is more prevalent than society realizes. Specifically for this portrait, she is able to bring a private issue (the fact that this woman has been living in an overturned car), into the public eye, which we learned is called sociological imagination. This brings awareness to others in society, that even if one does not see or know someone living in poverty; it does not mean that it does not exist. Hopefully, bringing personal issues into an impersonal world will change the viewpoints of people who just hear about it on the news and change the channel, and those who hear about it and take action.
I agree with the post above, that it is important to look at poverty with cross-sectional studies. As a student, I have learned so far in this class to be empathetic and realize that poverty is not always a personal problem, but that the structure of various government systems is also a problem. This is evident from the statistics shown in class. I am extremely interested in human rights and specifically labor laws. As a professional, I will be able to take this study of poverty and use it to physically make a difference.
I believe Neel's portrait has many angles apart from fully capturing the woman's devastation due to poverty. It not only brings awareness of her poverty situation, but also the picture shows an excellent representation of the system of whom "studies" poverty. I personally think Neel is encouraging the study vs. the action of poverty. This is because Neel includes the clergy, social workers, government employees, etc.. in order to represent "the system" and the key players who are simply observing, studying and not actually contributing and helping end poverty. (As pictured in the painting) I believe that there is a link from studying about poverty to providing a proper plan of action. I also believe sociological imagination is the ultimate link I speak of, and without it action cannot be fully taken.
There is a difference between studying poverty and doing something to end poverty. However I believe it's important to understand poverty before trying to end it. In the picture, we see a poor woman crying. She is surrounded by those who are superior to her. It doesn't seem that they are offering her support or help in any way. In order for action to be taken, one has to understand poverty. The sociological imagination is helpful in trying to understand poverty because it forces one to put themselves in someone else's shoes. The sociologoical imagination is important because in order to help people we need to understand their history and where they come from. In order to help poor people professionally, one needs to imagine going through the hardships that a poor person must go through. This will allow us to understand how they feel on a better level. After understanding what problems poor people face, one has a better idea of how to end poverty and necessary actions can be taken by those who can help.
“Studying poverty” and “doing something to end poverty” are two interrelated concepts.
The study of poverty is the primary action required to end poverty. According to C. Wright Mills, economic and political institutions must be studied in order to end poverty because poverty is a public concern rooted in structural problems. Without the study of poverty, and with only contributions directly to relief, no permanent change can occur. The immediate problems will be mitigated through the contribution of direct relief, but will then resurface when the relief is removed. In order to offer the greatest amount of assistance to the most citizens, the circumstances of poverty must be studied and specifically addressed.
Although the study of poverty is the first action involved in ending poverty, it cannot be the only action. In order to successfully alter the lives of the poor, the study of poverty must combine an objective view of poverty with an appreciation and understanding of the lives of the poor. In her portrait, Investigation of Poverty at the Russell Sage Foundation, Alice Neel suggests that those who study the poor are too far removed from its effects. In the portrait, the researchers, dressed in suits, study in a lavish room at the foundation while the poor woman lives in an overturned car with her seven children. The researchers offer little condolence, instead preferring to study the subject objectively. Neel suggests that the most important contribution to ending poverty is involvement in the lives of the poor. However, as interrelated concepts, “studying poverty” and “doing something to end poverty” must combine so that an understanding of the structural causes of poverty leads researchers to delve into the community and make lasting changes.
The sociological imagination, as defined by sociologist C. Wright Mills, suggests that citizens shift their views from private troubles to public concerns, and in doing so, view the world from the perspective of others. The sociological imagination is necessary in bridging the gap between study and action. Study of poverty, such as in Investigation of Poverty at the Russell Sage Foundation, may occur in an objective setting far removed from the actual problems. In order to spur action, researchers go beyond simply studying poverty and utilize sociological imagination to empathize with the thoughts and feelings of the poor. This idea has been stated in multiple posts as “putting yourself in someone else’s shoes.” Although this is a cliché way to discuss the role of empathy in the study of poverty, it summarizes the most important characteristic of a human service agent. Without empathy, the study of poverty remains as numbers and statistics. However, through the combination of study and empathy inherent in the sociological imagination, researchers understand the role of structural problems in poverty and seek to end them through involvement in the community and the legislature. Although Neel suggests that “doing something to end poverty” is paramount, to permanently change the plight of many citizens, poverty must first be studied. Only through the presence of knowledge through study and empathy through involvement and sociological imagination can poverty be removed.
The painting shows a woman crying and everyone else around her pitying her. The facial expressions in everyone else’s face show a look in which can be described as “I wish there was something I can do”. I believe Neel therefore encourages us to be able to understand poverty so we can do something in order to prevent a real life situation of the painting. It is important for us to study the etiology of poverty before we can take action to solve it. If we do not know the core and study it well, we cannot predict future trends, which would make it harder for us to understand how to approach it. Sociological imagination plays a big part in “studying and doing something to end poverty” because it lets you see things from different perspectives before we decide how we would take action into helping solve the issue of poverty. We understand how to fight things when we have a broader knowledge of something, which is why studying poverty would help to end it. Sociological imagination can go hand in hand with studying poverty in order to take action to end it.
I agree with poster #240's comments. Studying poverty is paramount in order to understand the causes and ultimately the solutions to it. At the same time, though, "doing something to end poverty" should not be underrated for the real and necessary help it offers people who desperately need it. I think this Alice Neel piece signifies that. I thought the portrait was very striking, showing the error that educated people can make by focusing only on the research aspect while in the process losing sight of the reason to end poverty - because of the devastation it brings to real people. The poor woman in the portrait is clearly in despair and yet the researchers, clergy, social workers, etc who should clearly be consoling this woman and providing direct aid cannot seem to put their research aside to help her. The Foundation mission precludes them from that as well - by their own admission they are there to study, not to engage in charity. She is mainly an exhibit in their research process. Yet studying poverty is ultimately utilized as a means to end poverty. Research should never lose sight of this, and I think Neel is clearly critiquing the researchers of this foundation for losing sight of the human element that should propel their research in the first place. As a student studying the issue of poverty, Neel's piece reminds me that the study of poverty exists foremost to help alleviate it. Studying poverty is necessary in order to understand the root causes of it, but direct aid should not fall by the wayside in the meantime. It will be a very long time until the root causes of poverty are fully addressed by society and action is needed now. Studying poverty should help propel the structural changes that can reduce it, though.
The sociological imagination ties into this. Poverty does not happen in a vacuum to one person who can be utilized as a case study. This woman in the picture is a product of her society, the economic system and climate she lives in, the government policies that do or not enable her to thrive, and so on. It is not simply about studying her to see what she did in her life to end up this way. Poverty is the expected result of the structural inequalities that exist in society. Individuals share a common thread - the greater society that shapes their individual outcomes. The sociological imagination calls on us to think deeper and look beyond individual explanations of poverty to something more. Once we understand the bigger picture we can work towards making the broad societal changes that will help people in poverty at the individual level.
The painting effectively describes the very objective of the Foundation to study poverty rather than directly resolving it. By depicting the members of the Foundation sitting around the mourning woman with their sad expressions, it suggests that they had the sympathy for the woman as a case subject for their study of poverty. However, they are depicted to stay in their seats without any actions following their sympathy. Essentially, this seems to suggest that they lacked the empathy to express their feelings in actions to make direct efforts for relief. The painting seems to suggest simply studying poverty and forming theories are not the answer to poverty unless they are carried out by proper actions. Theories without actions are like the blueprint of a product without the factory to produce it. In order to turn ideas and theories into an outcome, there must be actions.
Sociological imagination can help us to take individual cases and look at the problem at the macro level and use empathy rather than sympapthy to view the problem as your own and act to correct it.
Alice Neel’s “Investigation of Poverty at the Russell Sage Foundation” painting offers many implications to the viewer in regards to poverty. The way the figures are arranged creates a circular division of space separating the woman in the middle from the surrounding observers. This may suggest that although these empathetic professionals are studying the woman, they remain in their own “realm of society” and look on as outsiders. Thus, I think Neel is suggesting that we must realize that although “studying poverty” is beneficial no real change will occur unless something is done to end poverty. As a student and an eventual family professional, I think the study of poverty is essential to form a foundation for the problem we are trying to attack. If we do not know what we are trying to solve no effective change can possibly come about. I agree with blogger .240 that studying and doing something about poverty are interconnected. Thus, I think that there is a point where we must move apply all that we have learned and dive into action. A good stepping stone is utilizing the idea of sociological imagination, where we are called to step into “someone else’s shoes,” as blogger .205 also mentioned. Once, we can reach a common ground of applying learned facts and theories of poverty to the experiences of real people actually living in poverty, we will be able to transition from studying poverty to action. Action is the only way to solve the issue of poverty and I believe Alice Neel’s painting is calling us towards this mission.
Looking at Alice Neel’s painting titled “Investigation of Poverty at the Russell Sage Foundation” definitely encourages one to think about the difference between studying poverty and doing something to end poverty. A person viewing the painting and really taking in all the elements is studying poverty by seeing it’s devastating effects on not only the individual that is in poverty, but other members of the society as well. The painting really captures how bleak and desolate the woman in poverty feels at the time. The painting also does a good job of capturing the concern and sympathy of the people who want to help her. I think it is interesting that blogger .348 noted how the professionals studying the woman are just looking on and remain in their “own realm of society”. They have the intention of wanting to help her but at the same time are merely only studying her without doing anything beneficial for her.
Looking at the painting and analyzing the depiction of a woman in abject poverty can be done from afar without actually experiencing or seeing anything for oneself. However, the painting may stir feelings of sympathy in the individual who is viewing it and lead them to put themselves in her shoes. This could inspire people to do something to end poverty. In the painting, Neel shows the woman with her head in her hands, possibly crying, and the people surrounding her have sympathetic, somber looks on their faces, showing that they want to help her in some way but don’t know exactly how. There is a clear distinction between analyzing why this woman is in poverty versus actually providing her with a home and helping her get back on her feet. However, the study of poverty is essential to ending poverty because only by assessing the magnitude and finding the root of the problem can we put forth a comprehensive plan and take meaningful actions to end poverty. Sociological imagination involves connecting one’s private issues to public issues. It plays a critical role in enabling someone to understanding large societal problems in terms of his or her own personal ones. It also helps to bridge study and action by asking questions of why something is occurring (to the individual and also to others in society) and then wanting to solve those questions by taking action and researching the answers.
Neel's painting is an interesting portrayl of poverty and it's web of effects on everyone in society, not just those that encompass poverty in everyday life. It helps us to study poverty through the faces of all of the people involved in this woman's devastating situation. Each facial expression helps us to dive deeper into the pain and exhaustion that this woman's poverty is causing each person in the room, and even indirectly those people's families. She uses the people in the room effected by the woman's poverty to show the contrasts between studying poverty and actually ending it. The people in the room themselves are studying this woman and her situation. Their body language and expressions are what reveals this. As I forward my career as a family professional, I think studying poverty with the intention of ending it is extremely important in order to be helpful to the families that I will be working with. In an ideal world, no one would be in a state of poverty, however we face hardships each day, like the woman in the picture does. Being a family professional, I will need to understand a wide variety of poverty types and cases in order to attempt to right the wrongs. Through this understanding is where we develop our sociological imagination, which helps us to understand other's experiences and living a day in their shoes is really like. It is important, as a professional, to have this tool to bridge the gap in studying and acting towards poverty. It will help me to not just study these things but to make a difference by having the intended goal of studying be action in the end. In being open to empathize with families and their unique situations, I will be able to fit an action plan personalized to each in order to alleviate their specific situation. The socioloigical imagination and the contrasts between studying poverty and taking action are all encompassed in Neel's painting. And her ideas that are projected throught he colors and forms of the people in the room help us to understand the importance of poverty on all of society and not just those directly effected by its misfortunes.
Neel's portrait illustrates the normal view of poverty. Usually when one sees or hear of someone who lives in poverty, we are genuinely concerned. There are a lot of people who will listen and sympathize to people going through hard time but that's usually it. There seems to be a disconnect with sympathy and action. In the portrait, you see that everyone is studying her but she is still crying. She still looks like she has no hope. This should really makes us think. How many times have we heard heartbreaking stories but did nothing to try to alleviate the person's problem?
Neel encourages me to understand that people do not choose poverty. It is societal structures that children are born into and have no resources to escape the trap that is set. After the disaster in Haiti and reading the first two chapters in our textbook, I have now just begun to study poverty. I have been introduced to reality of poverty through media but I will actually begin to study poverty when I pack my bags and buy a plane ticket. I believe Neel is telling us that the study of poverty HAS NOT been related to an action in ending poverty. We have made our comments and turned off the television but what are we doing as a wealthy country in ending poverty? Neel understands that there is more to studying poverty and that is taking action and encourages us that we need to help people who are less fortune than us. Sociological imagination understands the relationship between the individual and society. When I look at problems such as unemployment and poverty, I understand that these are problems that a large amount of people go through but these problems are stemmed from the root of our social structure. If you don’t have health insurance you’re going to eventually die. Who would choose to live in poverty? People do make bad decisions but I bet if the opportunity was given to them they would get out as quick as possible. We must do something about poverty by putting ourselves in their shoes.
I agree with .308 comment. We have heard stories upteen times but have done nothing to really alleivate the problem. Some of us have the power to contribute to end poverty but do nothing about it. The earthquake that hit Haiti brought a lot of people together. After watching Hope for Haiti, I see what the unity of people can do for a country. We should do that more often and not just when a diaster occurs.
The contrast between studying poverty and taking action to alleviate poverty is a verb; the actual action of making the initiative to do something for the common good of the United States. One must place themselves in the shoes of another person, or try and imagine themselves without their daily luxuries. Neel has influenced me to study what causes poverty, and what actions a person can take to prevent him/her from being in this situation. I can imagine life in poverty, and this thought alone is enough to make me want to end poverty, because I don’t want anyone else to have to go through it. The sociological imagination plays a huge role in this because to effectively end poverty, we must understand the emotional, physical, intellectual and cognitive elements people face in poverty. Also, as a future family professional, I must begin to conduct studies to better understand poverty and why t happens to people. To do this I must conduct interviews when possible, and even conduct survey experiments to try and find a common theme. Neel has inspired me to take action and end poverty because no one should have to live in such desolate situations and decide whether to either get gas, or food with their last bit of money, etc...
I agree with what 381s10.205 has said, that it is important to be able “to put yourself in someone else’s shoes”. I also agree with Rachel, that “actions speak louder than words”. I believe that this is what the sociological imagination is all about. These two concepts are very important in both being able to “study poverty” as well as “doing something to end poverty”. Furthermore, without the sociological imagination it would be impossible to tackle poverty. Poverty is something that everyone knows about, but doesn’t necessarily experience. The sociological imagination allows us to empathize with those encountering poverty. It allows us to do our best to understand everything that goes along with being poor, without actually having to be poor. Going along with this, it is much easier for someone to just say to someone, you don’t have to be poor, you can choose not to be and change your life style, if you only choose to. But, in fact it is not this simple. With poverty there are multiple factors at play. Two of which are internal and external factors. I also think that its important to not look at poverty as a defining characteristic of the person, but as something that they are just going through. As Professor Roy stated, just about two-thirds of Americans experience poverty before the age of 75.
The contrast between studying poverty and doing something to end poverty is experiencing something is a lot more than reading about it in a textbook. And what Neel is portraying in this portrait is there are so many individuals who have the skills and education in order to help this woman. Also, the woman has so many resources around her that she should take advantage of. The study of poverty should include the idea of putting oneself in the position of the individual in poverty. Therefore, the individuals studying poverty should be more open and generous knowing how hard it is to go through poverty. I believe the study of poverty is related to action to end poverty because part of studying poverty is knowing how poverty started in the first place. As a result, individuals studying poverty should figure out a way to end the way its starts. Then, figure out a way to get individuals out of poverty. Sociological imagination plays a major role in bridging studying and actions because everyone has experience hard times and nothing is easy in life. Therefore, individuals could imagine how hard it must be for an individuals in poverty is feeling. And agree with Rachael in how 'actions speak louder than words' because studying and figure out how to stop poverty is one thing. But, actually spending the time physically helping others has a big difference. However, one has to study poverty in order for them to take action. As a result with personal experience individuals are studying poverty through experience and if they were to take action, they will have more of an advantage of making a bigger impact.
Neel encouraged me to think about the contrast between “studying poverty” and “doing something to end poverty” when looking at her painting. I saw within the painting, a woman who seemed to be studied by a bunch of other men. These men all had judging looks on their faces, as well as some men whispering to one another about this impoverished woman. I found it interesting that it was a woman in need of assistance and rather sexist that she was asking a group of all men (though it makes more sense for that time period) who were all seated in somewhat of a circle around the woman. It’s a lot easier to sit around and talk about what should be done or the statistics on poverty in this area, compared to actually do something, such as helping to raise money or even trying to help this woman and her children find a shelter to stay in, rather than an old car.
I think the study of poverty is related to action to end poverty because as one studies poverty, they begin to see that poverty is not always caused entirely by a person’s misspending. There can be numerous factors contributing to a person’s poverty level. Once the person understands that there are situational factors outside a person’s realm of control that can lead to poverty, this can cause a reaction to want to help end poverty. For instance, the earthquake in Haiti was horrific, but it also helped bring a spotlight to a country that has been poor for a very very long time. It is unfortunate that it took such devastation to make people take a second look at Haiti, but once people saw the pictures and stories, they wanted to physically do something to help that country.
At first I wasn’t sure what “sociological imagination” even meant. So I did some quick research and found that it was a concept founded by C. Wright Mills in 1959. He meant that people attribute certain things that happen in their lives based on larger social forces. For instance, if a person can’t find a job, they could blame it on a personal reason (not having enough schooling) or they could blame it on a larger social force such as the economy. The role of sociological imagination plays a part in bridging study and action together because if the person studying poverty has a sociological imagination that people are poor because of personal reasons (drugs, not working etc.), then of course they would feel there is no reason to be active to end poverty. However, if a person studying poverty understands that there are social forces outside a person’s control, then they would be more apt to wanting action and change for people living in poverty.
Through her painting, Neel allowed me to distinguish the difference between "studying poverty" and "doing something to end poverty” through her emphasis on the importance of the presence of each element in order to more effectively eradicate poverty. However, I believe that Neel highlighted more so on the execution of preventative measures to diminish the rate of poverty rather than the actual studying of poverty. Case in point, it is evident in the painting that the studying of the woman subjected to poverty still leaves her in an unhappy state of mind. Although studying poverty is vital in improving such conditions, I believe that Neel wanted to especially stress the need for active and effective participation by all to take place in order to really address and find solutions to this ongoing problem. Consequently, putting into practice what I learn is the only way that issues of this magnitude will be resolved. As a student and eventual family professional, I think that the study of poverty is directly related to the action to end poverty because it is important to first learn about the concepts and theories for why or how such crises evolve. After acquiring the necessary background knowledge, I may now be qualified to assess the situation and to come up with different possible scenarios to fix the problem at hand. Sociological imagination plays a large role in bridging study and action because it allows researchers to study how outside social structures precisely affect the individual lives of the infected population. Through the sociological imagination, the creation and implementation of programs, laws, and policies from the studies of real life situations will promote awareness as well as resolutions to these topics of concern. I therefore completely agree with 231’s view that the desire and motivation for change to occur happens through sociological imagination when a person willingly and actively studies the true reasoning behind the causes of poverty with the understanding that poverty very well occurs outside of the person’s control.
The idea behind studying poverty is focused on doing research and learning about different problems effecting people who are in poverty. Sociologists, psychologists, politicians and family professionals should consider the environment and family history of the people who are poor. They should also look at the people who are in poverty as individuals and not a collective whole. The actions taken to end poverty are the efforts of an individual to place programs and policies into effect that can alleviate poverty or provide people with assistance. Neel encourages you to not only study or “look” at poverty but to take action towards ending it. She also places a face and identity to the word poverty, which makes it a more personal to the viewer. In the painting we see a room full of people staring at the women, trying to study the issue but it is not only important to “study” but to also interview and interact with the poor in order to get a clear view of what actions should be taken to help. The sociological imagination refers to the capacity to see how incidents in the lives of individuals can result from large social forces. If people step back to analyze the larger pressures within a society they can study where the individual falls on this spectrum. This is directly aligned with the efforts of action, after studying the programs and policies in place the politicians etc. can replace or take action to enhance them.
I agree with 308, “Neel's portrait illustrates the normal view of poverty. Usually when one sees or hear of someone who lives in poverty, we are genuinely concerned…but there seems to be a disconnect with sympathy and action.” All of the individuals around this women, social workers, academics, and clergy, show great concern for her and her family, but none are actually doing anything to help easy her problems. I believe Neel is trying to show us that being enlightened is no longer enough, that we must apply ourselves and do something.
Though it is important to study poverty in order to create more useful and effective plans of how to end it, Neel stresses the importance of making that transition from studying to helping. Her painting emphasizes that studying is merely the beginning step of helping the poor. Though the woman is being observed by those surrounding her, she is not actually being helped from the observation. The people studying her must try to do something to get her and her seven children living in a suitable home, rather than an overturned car. To change the situation, action, rather than simple examination, must be put into effect.
Though the helpers must put a plan into action, poverty must be studied to ensure the success rates of the plans are effective. In order to help reduce poverty, one must know the causes, the demographics of who is affected, and where high rates of poverty are located. Without knowing these aspects, a plan may focus on the wrong group of people in the wrong place. Also, it may be focused on fixing one cause of poverty that is not truly the root of the problem. From the illustration, we can see the social workers studying the woman. This depiction of studying poverty puts each individual in poverty at fault for their own situation, which is the cultural perspective. The social workers are studying the woman, not other causes outside of her control that may have negatively effected her financial situation. Examining various aspects of poverty is a foundation needed to take action to help the people affected.
In order to make a significant aspect on a prevalent issue, such as poverty, the public must become aware of the problem and its impact on society. Shifting poverty from a private issue to an issue known to the public is known as having a sociological imagination. As Rachael stated in her blog, everyone may not see the woman living in an overturned car, but the fact that her and her seven children are living there does not change. I think bringing poverty into the public eye is extremely important in helping. Unfortunately, poverty is a widespread, prevalent problem. Though each individual’s effort makes a difference somewhere, participation from large groups and organizations are needed in order to truly reduce poverty.
In order to truly help reduce the prevalence of poverty, various aspects of the problem must be studied. People attempting to help circumstances must examine not only each family’s individual case, but also the surrounding factors. Lastly, the issue must be exposed to the public. Many people and organizations must be willing to put efforts towards helping poor families in order to make a difference nationally.
In the United States it is hard to study poverty because it is something that most people do not like talking about. In order to study poverty, one would have to find people living in these conditions whom are open to talking about their situation and the way in which they live. Due to this, the ability of others to do something about poverty is relatively hard. In order for something to be done, the issue needs to be understood. With so little known about how it is to live on the lower side of the threshold, it is hard to be empathetic. Since the majority of Americans do not know what it is like to live without the basic essentials to live, they can not truly understand the turmoil that those in poverty are going through.
In order to end/improve poverty, the sociological imagination plays a huge role in order to comprehend the physical, mental, and emotional demands that these people are facing. By being able to empathize with these people, the nation will be able to come up with ideas to help these people get out of poverty. However, in order to do this, more studies need to be done to truly understand these issues. Since most people end up getting themselves out of poverty after only a short time, cross-sectional studies need to be done. These studies will allow for multiple people to study at once in order to get multiple perspectives about the different problems being faced. From these studies, government officials and philanthropic groups can be formed in order to help combat these issues. In order for something to be done about poverty, it needs to be better studied.
I completely agree with 201. When we see this image we see the woman suffering and grieving in the middle of a room. The image seems very sad and depressing. The colors that Neel uses for everyone’s clothing are all dark shades of black, grey and blue. The woman who is crying in the middle of the room also seems to have a dark colored hanger chef in her hand. I feel that her use of colors including the background colors are representation of meloncony and depression. As it has been stated before, everyone is staring at her and not helping her even cope with her sobs. There are 2 men in the background that seem to be talking and gossiping. This is what people do, they know what’s going on and instead of trying to help someone they gossip. I think Neel tried to show people how they “look” when they are not doing anything for someone that they could possibly be helping. The study of poverty in my opinion is an eye opening experience that leads to action to end poverty. The more a person learns and understands about poverty the more they are able to help in productive ways and help other individuals out in need. Sociological imagination plays a huge role in bringing study and action to poverty. The reason for this is that people sometimes need excuses or reasons to do things; some need a creative push while others may need a statistical/educated approach to things. If programs can be created and tactful to help capture a grater spectrum of society so that they don’t have an excuse to deny study and action, it could go a long way.
Neel encourages me to think about the contrast between “studying poverty” and “doing something is end poverty”, because there is a difference between listening to someone’s problems and helping them solve their problems. Anyone can listen to the struggles of a family that has nowhere to live and nothing to eat, but takes a certain person to find resources and solutions for the family, so they won’t have to live in poverty any longer. As a student and an eventual family professional, I believe the study of poverty is an eye opener and starting point to first understanding the dynamics of poverty and how people end up living in poverty. Projects like the one we will be completing, helps us picture what life would be like if we had to live in poverty. Like blogger 313 said sociological imagination “helps to bridge study and action by asking questions of why something is occurring (to the individual and also to others in society) and then wanting to solve those questions by taking action and researching the answer”. If we as professionals are able to ask the initial question of how this happened to the family and how could society let this happen then we are able to come up with a solution to the problem. For example, if a child is living of the street alone, a professional may ask the child why his/her parents kicked them or they choose to run away. Furthermore one could inquire as to why no one in the community decided to take this child in or teachers didn’t notice something going on with the child.
Response to 309's post
I do agree with 309. The painting does not contribute to the end of poverty it contributes to the observation of poverty. People who want to end poverty must understand how the people in poverty feel and adjust to being in poverty. Neel’s painting expresses the sympathy of people who are in poverty. People who study poverty need an “action plan” that will end poverty to understand the full effects of poverty.
I do believe that Neel wanted to encourage people to think of the difference between studying poverty and doing something to end poverty. I see this painting though as more of a critique of the Sage Foundation and their intentions. The way that she placed the woman in the center with all the members huddled around, "studying" her dehumanizes the woman and makes her seem more like a lab rat. I think that the faces in the portrait do give off that "I wish i could do something" look and this was no accident by Neel. She wanted us to see this and say, "you can do something, stop studying her and help this poor woman!" While I do understand Neel's point, I do not agree with it. This is where the sociological imagination is necessary. You must be able to take a step back and look at this woman, not as a woman, but as an individual representation of a larger societal problem. Yes, these members of the organization could pitch in and fix all of this woman's problems almost instantly. But that is not what the foundation set out to do. They intended to make a "a permanent contribution to the improvement of living and social conditions" of the impoverished. Would buying this woman a house help her? Yes. Would it make a permanent contribution to ending poverty? No. When this woman passed away the problem still exist. This is why studying poverty is an essential step to ending poverty. If you help an individual, you are not changing much. The structures and disadvantages that caused that individual to end up in poverty will still exist and still send more people to the same place. Only by truly understanding how those in poverty ended up in poverty can we begin to disassemble the perpetuating destructive social structures that cause poverty.
Thinking about the contrast between “studying poverty” and “doing something to end poverty” encourages individuals to find out the truths behind poverty. There are many misconceptions and assumptions about those living in poverty. Studying poverty allows for one to fully gain knowledge explaining the reasons poverty occurs, gain new understandings or findings and hopefully motivate others to take action. Being able to research and find statistical data allows for organizations to be created helping those in need. However, in order to do such research, researchers must examine all institutional structures before being able to begin to end poverty. C. Wright Mills believed that within a small structure of individuals being wealthy was attributed to the individual but within a much larger structure, being wealthy is reflected upon limited opportunities. Examining all structures in a society limits the possibility of basing poverty solely on personal situations. The idea of “doing something to end poverty” relies on the knowledge gained from “studying poverty”. Taking action to end poverty is extremely beneficial when knowledge is attained because it allows individuals to know where help is needed.
Social imagination is the shift from personal troubles to public concern. Social imagination links the study of poverty and taking action because if one does not know about the issues with poverty, they could find themselves actually living in poverty. However, more commonly, people do ignore that poverty exists because the gap between the rich and the poor is so large. This gap enables individuals to imagine their own lives in poverty. Knowing about poverty and seeing the effects of poverty at times influences others to take action. Being able to socially imagine ones own life as poor, increases the possibility of taking action.
I also agree with .308 and .336 bloggers because there really are not a lot of people doing things to help those in need. As blogger .336 said we always help in times of disasters or extreme emergencies. A perfect example of this happened during the blizzard. I heard on the news, “if you see a homeless person, please call 911 so they can get to shelter”. It was nice to see that there were people doing something about those on the streets but what about now? The homeless individuals were put back on the streets and continue to live in the same conditions as before. I know there are soup kitchens, homeless shelters, and other organizations that help the homeless, but is that enough considering the realities of homelessness.
Neel’s portrait encourages a difference between “studying poverty” and “doing something to end poverty.” Neel expresses that so much time is being spent to determine what is poverty and who is living in poverty. The men painted in suits gathered around the mother of seven children seem to be taking all the time in the world to decide where the mother went wrong and what to do with her. “Do something to end poverty” would not demonstrate men in suits sitting to discuss poverty. “Do something to end poverty” is taking action towards finding solutions and meanwhile giving the family hope that there is a solution for poverty. As a future family professional I believe the study of poverty and acting upon poverty is important. I believe the best form of studying poverty is to actively engage with poor families and discover what lead to poverty. Showing sympathy and understanding towards poor families should be demonstrated towards finding solutions. Getting to know poor families personally will help social workers get a better understanding what these families require in order to prosper. A sociological imagination helps society understand that disadvantaged families don’t need a group of men in suits observing or studying their circumstances. Showing the families sympathy and not criticism is a much better image towards finding solutions for poverty.
I agree with person 346 that there is a different between listening to one's problems and acting to find a solution. I believe that being an active listener is important but at the same time discussing possible solutions for poverty should be included. Not only discussing solutions but work along side that disadvantaged family and show support verbally and physically.
As another blogger stated, studying poverty requires that we “put ourselves in another person’s shoes”. While this is certainly a component to truly understanding (or emphasizing with those in) poverty, I believe it takes much more thought to begin a process of poverty termination. Indeed, C. Wright Mills’ sociological imagination is necessary to find a solution to this problem for it is with the sociological imagination that the very structure and foundation of society can be scrutinized. Understanding one person’s individual needs may make it possible to change their particular relationship with poverty, but to take action on a nation-wide scale we need to identify the societal process that seem to perpetuate poverty. For instance, one social fact present in the South Bronx as described in Amazing Grace is a severe lack of employment. As Kozol states on page 62, employment is the “greatest need in the neighborhood” and the lack thereof leaves even the most motivated people jobless. Contrary to what cultural theory states, some of the poverty in this neighborhood is not due to individual characteristics like laziness or drug addiction but is a result of society-wide systems. One benefit of studying poverty is determining information about which demographics are most effected by it (for example, 40% of people on welfare are between the ages 25 and 65), but if these research methods remain basic they will not solve any specific problems. We must devote energy to applied research as well in order to improve the gears in society’s machine that lag behind.
The idea of studying poverty I believe has been present in our society for decades. In this picture the people around the woman are just staring at her as if she was an exhibit probably thinking "poor thing." Currently the same attitude I believe is shared with the commercials where you can "adopt a child" for a dollar a day or whatever the price. The commercials show videos of children who are malnourished and living in dismal conditions. Many people don't even really care about them because they see these things so much that they become desensitized to them. Another example is when people see homeless on the street and don't spare some change or even look at them. People see poverty as the problem of others and not as a problem of society that every individual needs to be concerned with and that needs to change.
Sociological imagination is the ability to place yourself into the shoes of others to perceive the world from their eyes. Before judging and attempting to shape the world into the perfect reality we envision we must first be able to distinguish and really analyze not only the person, but the underlying problems.
The picture portrays a woman in disparity with a group of well-dressed men and women possibly generating judgment, as to why her face is buried in her hands. Rather than placing blame on the individual we must first consider the economic situation their placed in. When we take the blame away from the individual and evaluate attributions such as education, environment, and in general social class we can see factors as to why families remain in poverty. Only after reviewing outside factors do we have the ability to create solutions. As a student pursuing a family professional we have to take into account all the factors contributing to poverty rather than ignorantly believing that it’s a personally based issue.
Alice Neel’s portrait illustrates how observing a situation does not improve or remove the situation. From the looks of it, “the grief-stricken woman” has her face buried in her hands, which clearly shows the lack of help she’s receiving. Although the social workers and others show great concern for the lady, they are not contributing to the solution of the lady’s problem of poverty. This portrayal is how Neel encourages people to contrast observing versus doing.
Just by looking and interpreting this picture, observing poverty seems to be pointless…useless. However, that is not the case. It just takes more than looking at what’s taking place to make changes. Identifying that there is a poverty is the first step towards improvement. Then, observations play a key role in attempting to end poverty. We can’t just say that poverty exists and look for methods directly to end it. Instead, we need to observe where poverty exists, the effects it has on people and society, how it aroused. Such crucial observations lead people to formulating ideas about what approaches to utilize to attack different aspects of poverty. So then we can make such conclusions as poverty existing in this area because the drug rate is high, and many people become victims of the drug world. From there, the need to remove the drugs is revealed and motions are set to get rid of the drugs. Poverty is a big concern, and poor people are created in various ways. Therefore, observations are crucial to understanding what situations you are dealing with. Then, action can take place. To observe or to take action are not beneficial. We must combine these acts to see advancement towards ending poverty.
In response to Rachael's post, the phrase "actions speak louder than words" is the perfect way to sum up Neel's ideas. I do not believe Neel was trying to reveal how prevalent poverty was; instead, I think she was trying to emphasize that actions do lead to improvement in our poverty level. In general, I think it's quite easy to see and understand that poverty exists and is a major concern but many people don't realize what actually classifies as making a difference. Neel's portrait illustrates that observing the poor does not actually help them. And that's where we begin to think that we must go a step further and actually do something to help tackle poverty.
Neel encourages her viewers to think about the stark contrast between study and action. If we just studied something our whole lives, nothing would happen! Of course education is key before taking action, but we have to eventually get to the action or nothing will get done.
If someone takes life-guarding classes and studies how to be a life guard, well that’s nice… I guess. Then suddenly he is in his chair watching all the people swimming when he notices that a young boy in the diving well is drowning. If the life guard sat there and watched, the child would die. We know that the life guard is educated, but what good is his education if he doesn’t put it to good use, if he does not take action?
I think study and education is crucial to be effective in this field. It’s important to know the statistics, it’s important to know how to interact with cultural competency, and it’s most certainly important to understand the changes our world is going through. If we are not educated then we may have a difficult time be a convincing or affective professional. As a professional it’s important to know what programs are affective, and what organizations to support.
Still, the second part of this is the action. You educate yourself IN ORDER to take action, in order to make physical change. In class we discussed how often people that have resources and education and such cannot even begin to think what it is like to have poverty. I think unless you are immersed in it, and getting your hands dirty, and actually helping, you cannot being to conceive what poverty is. Education is not the end all be all. Being part of the action is what truly gives us the incite.
In reaction to 309...
I appreciated how you picked up on the system of individuals who are involved in poverty education and the study of poverty. Perhaps this system is both a blessing and curse to the alleviation of poverty. I think often times these individuals: social workers, government officials, and clergy, do not communicate frequently enough. This lack of dialogue between these different systems creates even more frustration for the individual in poverty. Even with all of these people around who study poverty, this woman in the portrait feels so alone because of the lack of communication in that terribly quiet and dark room.
I think however, if these different "helpers' worked together and communicated more frequently we could alleviate poverty in a more effective way.
Through her painting “Investigation of Poverty at the Russell Sage Foundation,” Neel encourages us to think about the contrast between “studying poverty” and “doing something to end poverty”. In the painting, you can clearly how various type of people look at the women in the middle with concern, but like many, acknowledging poverty is all we as a society do. Neel makes us realize that studying and being aware of poverty is simply not enough to end poverty. We, as a society, need to get up and actually do something to end poverty. Poverty will not disappear on its own simply by studying about it. Getting aware of a situation is the first step and taking action is the next step. As a society, we are missing step two, which involves taking action. We are very aware of the situation we live in and poverty around us. The media such as television, Internet, newspaper, etc. does a great job in notifying us about the poverty many people are facing. As a student and an eventual family professional, I think the study of poverty is related to action to end poverty because we are currently in step one, which is studying about poverty. After step one, comes step two, which is taking action. This is the reason why we as students are preparing ourselves and seeking a degree, in order to take and give back to society and help in everything we can. As a family science major that is taking FMSC 381, I am learning about poverty in families and its effects. I hope that this will help me to take action to try to do something about the poverty many families face. If each individual took something from what they have learned and did something about trying to end poverty, this country would be a better place. However, most of us are like the people in the painting, who just observes people in need with pity and compassion and think that the next person will help. Each of us depends on the next person to help, but since most of us think that way, no one really ends up actually helping the poor. Till each person as an individual decides to take action, maybe then can there be decrease or atleast stability in poverty. I agree with Rachael that said that only because we do not see or know someone living in poverty, does not mean that poverty does not exist. I completely agree with this. Maybe someone is oblivious to the fact that poverty exists in the world because they are not living it in their own lives. Some people may be aware that poverty exists, but may pretend they do not know to clear their conscious. The truth is that poverty exists even if we do not see it around us.
In response to 381s10.205,
Thank you for your response. That is the point I was trying to make. The system itself is very useful I just feel as if sometimes the system does not exactly have the ability to make sure that the social workers etc.. have empathy. And the ability to empathize, not sympathize with the client.
The difference between studying poverty and actually taking action to end it is actually being exposed to the what poverty is. I believe most people who try and fight against poverty have one never experienced it themselves and two dont even know what the conditions for poverty are. In the picture a woman who lives in an overturned car with her children is crying and she is surounded by figures who are far well off than her, but no one lends a helping hand or a word of advice. I believe until one hasnt experienced poverty, they cannot help alleviate the conditions. The sociological imagination is helps by taking real life poverty issues and putting them in the public eye, and raising awareness of the problems families in poverty face on a daily basis. I believe we should realize that poverty is part social and part the persons fault. Understanding what poverty is and how it affects us can only be fixed if we put ourselves in others' shoes, and not just post a number a salary a family must make to be considered in poverty.
Alice Neel's portrait of the study of poverty allows the viewer to take a second look, and to actually think about the dynamics going on in within systems to alleviate people from poverty. Neel encourages people to think about the difference between studying poverty and doing something by portraying a more humanistic view in her art work. While the people of power in this picture represent the various systems of relief look at the poor in crisis with mystery and curiosity, it is clear that the poor people in this picture are in need of more than just financial support. The grief and body language of the mother on the table with her head down show the emotional side of poverty that may not be so easily assessed by others. It is important to study poverty in order to end it, but I think the study of poverty should contain more than merely reading or note taking. The study of poverty allows researchers to be able to have knowledge about how poverty affects and what groups are most in need, as well as the most successful services to them. I agree with what 307 wrote about how poverty relates to the sociological imagination by saying that although we may not see it is does exist. To elaborate, I think that while the individual is the one who suffers from poverty these image shows the many different social structures that have the power to help or hinder those who are in need.
Based upon Alice Neel’s portrait of a poor mother of seven, surrounded by a committee of people to improve living and social conditions says much about studying poverty and doing something to end it. It seems as though the people in the picture were brought together to do something about the issue in society, but in contrast, by evening looking at their clothing, it shows they are better off than the mother in the center. They are not actually physically out in the world doing something about the issue with poverty. Its seems as though they are studying it rather than doing something to end it. As a student, I think the study of poverty is related to the action of ending poverty in some ways. A person has to know what poverty is and to better understand that, one has to research about it and see how others less fortunate live. When someone knows how people in poverty are living, they get an idea of how to help and make a difference in society. Sociological Imagination plays a role in bridging study and action. When it’s all played out in a person’s head, they have a plan, and then they execute the plan. The plan becomes reality.
These questions are directly towards two different audiences: those who think and those who act. Some live their lives by only taking action when a problem arises and directly affects them. In these situations it is best to plan for the worst and act on the emotional drive you would have if the situation was as worse as it could get. This would help solve a lot of problems before they happen.
To be able to relate with the woman in the center of the group, I question if she is crying from being ashamed of her lifestyle or if she is in shock because she may have thought she was providing the best she could for her family and that was not good enough for the social standards of that time. I think that no one can truly understand poverty until they experience it long enough until they feel that it is the only lifestyle they will ever have and they do not have any hope. No one could understand what it is like by simply studying it. Living it is when one would be able to more accurately come up with a realistic solution.
I found this piece of artwork to be extremely thought provoking. It is interesting to see how Neel perceived the “study of poverty” because it gives a perspective that I often don’t consider. To me, the painting has an almost eery, creepy feeling to it—like these “scientists” seated around the woman are spectators to her pain, almost like she is an exhibit at a zoo, or a voluntary test-subject in an experiment rather than a woman clearly experiencing great pain. These observers are sitting, watching, studying this woman, consulting their colleagues about her every mannerism—it almost seems like they should be wearing stark, white coats armed with clipboards—and once they leave the room they will forget all about the struggles of the woman, but may recall quantitative traits of the “subject”.
People who study poverty, it seems, rarely adorn themselves in lab coats for fear that this makes themselves or their research appear cold or unfeeling; but on some level it is just these things. The “subjects” of poverty studies are people, they are not statistics, they are not just numbers, and as Jonathan Kozol demonstrates through his experiences writing Amazing Grace, this is rarely more apparent than when you truly go down into the trenches with individuals, when you throw yourself in to the lives of real people—which is exactly what most poverty research does. Once you have met truly poor people, or even read a book like Amazing Grace, “the poor” are no longer just “those people, out there somewhere”, they are tangible, they are real. So how is it that some people can emerge themselves in the lives of the poor and not have the desire to work towards changing the elements of society that only keeps those people down? This is truly where the sociological imagination comes in to play: are you, as an individual, capable of being empathetic? Are you able to see the world from the eyes of another? Can you not only identify the societal problems attributing to poverty, but do you also work to change them? This last question in, in my opinion, is where the key to ending poverty lies, but is also the biggest obstruction to its destruction as well. We, as society, have done plenty of studies on poverty, we have gathered lots of statistics, we know poverty is there, we have identified trends, we have seen the affects it can have on every aspect of a person’s life, and we feel bad about it, but this is too often where it ends. It is like the commercial you see on TV asking you to donate money to feed kids in Africa or to save abused animals, you see the images and you think it is truly sad, but you change the channel and minutes later forget about it once more. Individuals do this, in my opinion, not because they are bad people but simply because it is very easy to forget about something that is not constantly present in everyday life. When we see reminders that there is poverty, we feel bad, we may even pledge to do something about it, but often times we soon forget and little is done. In order to bridge the gap between study/knowledge of poverty and action, individuals must work to better utilize their sociological imagination. People must not only identify and understand that there are factors in society contributing to poverty, but also realize the difference their individual actions can make. Those of us who are not giving constant reminders of poverty’s existence in everyday life need to make the choice to actively remember (everyday) those people in our world who are struggling, and make a conscious effort to alleviate some of those struggles by being less selfish in our thinking—even if it just amounts to something small like: voting to pass anti-poverty acts in your community, or being willing to pay a few dollars more in taxes so that every child can have a quality education, safe home, and adequate nutrition.
Alice Neel’s painting titled “Investigation of Poverty at the Russell Sage Foundation” definitely encourages me to think about the difference between studying poverty and actually taking actions to end it. It’s fundamentally easier to sit around a woman impoverished telling her story, and pulling out pieces of her life to study the many ways in which she has came to her poor status; but to actually gain the compassion, empathy and agility to take action to end poverty for her and for others is another thing. So I believe that there is an interrelationship with “study” and “action” but there are key characteristics that bridge these two together. And those characteristics are compassion, empathy, agility and the ability to imagine someone else’s life on the lower extreme. And if it means going into their neighborhoods, living life on their limited budget, or just simply reading their stories, then so be it. We need to create a sociological imagination that detaches itself from assumptions, to stably bridge “study” and “action” together. The social workers, academics, and clergy in this painting are watching her with great concern. However, if pity is the main feeling flowing through their hearts, then they’ve got the wrong idea. Sympathy and empathy are two different ideas. And most times the government social workers, academic scholars, and political figures may confuse the two. I personally feel as though we have gone through the first step which is research and study, now it’s time for us as a nation to put our pride aside and take the big leap across the bridge into poverty recovery.
This painting shows the group staring at the woman while she appears to be hiding her face and gaining more stress. I think that the painting is meant to show people that it is important to study people by empathizing with them and understanding their struggles so that they can help them the most effectively. If people are asking a bunch of questions and probing at someone like they are to the lady in the painting then it is only causing more stress and sorrow in the ladies life and not really helping her at all. As a future professional I feel that it is important to study poverty using social imagination first so that you have a well-educated background on the policies effect the families as well as what issues and struggles the families are facing day to day. Once you understand family’s specific needs and the policies and social/cultural structures that cause the family’s needs, one can then try to find change that can help the family. It is crucial to make sure that the changes would actually end the needs of these families in the best way possible. As my fellow blogger, 202, stated “We understand how to fight things when we have a broader knowledge of something, which is why studying poverty would help to end it.” In order to have that broader knowledge we must personally understand the struggles and sacrifices people in poverty are facing so that the appropriate changes can take place and alive some of the struggles.
Post a Comment