Scott Branesford
In Scott Bransford article “Camping for Their Live”, Bransford writes about a newlywed couple Marie and Francisco Caro and many other homeless people in California’s Central Valley. The Caros didn’t have enough money to put a down payment on a home therefore they became homeless. Bransford uses a concerned tone when writing about the homeless in California. Bransford has some strengths and some weaknesses in his article. The purpose of this article is to describe the development of tent cities and the people who live in them. Bransford is biased towards helping homeless people. Bransford has a concerned and sympathic tone in his article about the homeless people in California’s Central Valley. One of the tones that Bransford appears to have
…show more content…
in this article is a concerned one. Bransford also has a sympathetic tone. This is so because Bransford shows sympathy towards the conditions that the homeless people are living in. Bransford thinks that everyone should have the safe place to live and not be worried about the dangers of the world around them. Bransford is concerned that the homeless people that are living in the tent cities are not safe. Bransford is concerned that people living in the tent cities are more likely to steal because they don’t have anything. Homeless people are more likely to do anything they can in order to survive this could even include killing someone in order to get something they want or more likely something they need. This isn’t always the case a lot of homeless people are nicer than the rich people of the world. Bransford is also concerned that there are too many people that are homeless. Bransford states that “Crime is a concern here- according to the county estimates, forty one percent of the homeless population has been incarcerated at some point” (Bransford, 2014, p. 395). Bransford feels it is not safe to live in these tent cities because almost half of the homeless population has been incarcerated, but Bransford never says what the people were incarcerated for so it could be as minor as a failure to show up to a court date. Bransford also has a sympathetic tone in the fact that he shows sympathy towards the people that are living homeless. The main point of Bransfords article is to describe the development of tent cities and the people who live in them.
The main point is to describe the development of tent cities and the people who live in them.
Tent cities have been around for a very long time they were just called Hoovervilles. Bransford says that “Even tent city residents themselves feel trapped in circular trajectories of history, doomed to lives shaped by the threat of lawlessness and the ever-looming peril of relocation” (Bransford, 2014, p. 394). Residents in the tent cities feel like they are a part of history because of the Hoovervilles during the Great Depression. The Hooverilles were homeless camps that were a major deal during the depression in the 1930s; many people blamed President Herbert Hoover (Bransford, 2014, p. 394). That is how the Hooervilles got their name because of President Herbert Hoover. Bransford also talks about how people had to make squatter camps as a do or die alternative to the places that had rejected the homeless (Bransford, 2014, p. 394). In the end the homeless did get a safer place to live where it was affordable this place is known as Dignity Village. In the Dignity Village the residents were only required to do ten hours of community service a week (Bransford, 2014, p.397). There are some strengths and some weaknesses in Bransford’s
article.
One of the strengths is that Bransford actually visits with the Caro’s so he knows what the Caros are living like because Bransford has seen it with his own eyes. This is a true fact, because he says “When I visited the Caro’s in January, a fire burned in a repurposed oil barrel, warming the cold air...” (Bransford, 2014, p. 393). Another strength is that he gives you other homeless people from the past to compare them to the ones today. One of Bransfords weaknesses is that Bransford is not actually homeless so he is getting all this information from a second person. He only says that he meets with one couple, but he has quotes from other people about what the tent cities are like. Another weakness that Bransford has is the fact that he was only looking a small portion of the homeless people so this might not be true everywhere else in the world. Bransford could make his argument stronger if he had interviewed more homeless people from other places not just in the California Central Valley.
In conclusion, Bransford makes some really good arguments in the article. Homeless don’t feel like they are safe. The homeless feel as if they are repeating history because they feel like they are in the Hoovervilles of the Great Depression. The homeless people feel like they have to do everything to do everything in order to not be rejected from a place. The homeless people were happy that they had a place that was safe and affordable and they only thing they had to do were ten hours of community service a week. There is concerned and sympathetic tone in the article that Bransford wrote about homeless people.
in this article is a concerned one. Bransford also has a sympathetic tone. This is so because Bransford shows sympathy towards the conditions that the homeless people are living in. Bransford thinks that everyone should have the safe place to live and not be worried about the dangers of the world around them. Bransford is concerned that the homeless people that are living in the tent cities are not safe. Bransford is concerned that people living in the tent cities are more likely to steal because they don’t have anything. Homeless people are more likely to do anything they can in order to survive this could even include killing someone in order to get something they want or more likely something they need. This isn’t always the case a lot of homeless people are nicer than the rich people of the world. Bransford is also concerned that there are too many people that are homeless. Bransford states that “Crime is a concern here- according to the county estimates, forty one percent of the homeless population has been incarcerated at some point” (Bransford, 2014, p. 395). Bransford feels it is not safe to live in these tent cities because almost half of the homeless population has been incarcerated, but Bransford never says what the people were incarcerated for so it could be as minor as a failure to show up to a court date. Bransford also has a sympathetic tone in the fact that he shows sympathy towards the people that are living homeless. The main point of Bransfords article is to describe the development of tent cities and the people who live in them.
The main point is to describe the development of tent cities and the people who live in them.
Tent cities have been around for a very long time they were just called Hoovervilles. Bransford says that “Even tent city residents themselves feel trapped in circular trajectories of history, doomed to lives shaped by the threat of lawlessness and the ever-looming peril of relocation” (Bransford, 2014, p. 394). Residents in the tent cities feel like they are a part of history because of the Hoovervilles during the Great Depression. The Hooverilles were homeless camps that were a major deal during the depression in the 1930s; many people blamed President Herbert Hoover (Bransford, 2014, p. 394). That is how the Hooervilles got their name because of President Herbert Hoover. Bransford also talks about how people had to make squatter camps as a do or die alternative to the places that had rejected the homeless (Bransford, 2014, p. 394). In the end the homeless did get a safer place to live where it was affordable this place is known as Dignity Village. In the Dignity Village the residents were only required to do ten hours of community service a week (Bransford, 2014, p.397). There are some strengths and some weaknesses in Bransford’s
article.
One of the strengths is that Bransford actually visits with the Caro’s so he knows what the Caros are living like because Bransford has seen it with his own eyes. This is a true fact, because he says “When I visited the Caro’s in January, a fire burned in a repurposed oil barrel, warming the cold air...” (Bransford, 2014, p. 393). Another strength is that he gives you other homeless people from the past to compare them to the ones today. One of Bransfords weaknesses is that Bransford is not actually homeless so he is getting all this information from a second person. He only says that he meets with one couple, but he has quotes from other people about what the tent cities are like. Another weakness that Bransford has is the fact that he was only looking a small portion of the homeless people so this might not be true everywhere else in the world. Bransford could make his argument stronger if he had interviewed more homeless people from other places not just in the California Central Valley.
In conclusion, Bransford makes some really good arguments in the article. Homeless don’t feel like they are safe. The homeless feel as if they are repeating history because they feel like they are in the Hoovervilles of the Great Depression. The homeless people feel like they have to do everything to do everything in order to not be rejected from a place. The homeless people were happy that they had a place that was safe and affordable and they only thing they had to do were ten hours of community service a week. There is concerned and sympathetic tone in the article that Bransford wrote about homeless people.