Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- week_4_questions_comments-325_25 [2025/09/18 04:22] – 173.71.211.46
+++ week_4_questions_comments-325_25 [2025/09/18 10:59] (current) – [Document: Edison Bowers, "Is It Safe to Work?"] 73.99.248.106
@@ Line 22: / Line 22: @@
 I find it particularly interesting that railroad imagery becomes this tool for negotiating the contradictions of American expansion. Railroads as a cultural symbol were both optimistic and cautionary. - Callie H.
+Danly argues that railroads, and their depiction in American art in the late 19th century are directly reflective of the American sentiment toward the industrial boom occurring in the country at the time. In particular, the complexity of the industrial boom and railroads as they relate to nature and it's resources. - Abby Firestone
+Danly argued that the landscape art framed the peoples attitude and perspective on railroads in the 19th century. -Izzy Ellenberger
+Danly's argument explains how humanity was stepping out of bounds of that world it once lived in where it was in harmony with nature.  The railroad was the key to breaking that because it allowed men to expand further and faster than before, thus having a drastic impact on the natural ecosystem.  Biggest and well known example is no doubt the decimation of the buffalo herds. - David Y.
+Danly's argument was more than just a subject of art as is severed as a cultural symbol, by showing the new technology and progress to the frontier and a national identity. - Will Crane
 === How were railroads represented in American art? ===
@@ Line 40: / Line 48: @@
 The depiction of railroads in early American art was no doubt romanticized. These landscapes were beautiful, depicting the coexistence of the previous untouched and vast wilderness and fields of the American countryside, with puffs of smoke blending in with the clouds. There were mountains, rainbows, beams of light shining from above. Highly idealized visions of what was still a very early concept in America’s technological innovations. Photographs ushered in a new tone, depicting the dark, gritty, moody nature of reality. Thus, painting followed this modernist view of a completely mechanized life, no longer picturesque. – Izabella Martinez
+Railroads, as depicted in the art present in this reading, are romanticized, and represent what may have been considered an ideal relationship between the vast natural landscape of America (in particular its "unexplored" regions), and the new technologies that came with increased railroad presences and further industrialization. - Abby Firestone
+The railroads were represented as a transformation and relationship with both industrialization and nature. It also depicts expansion and technological change. -Izzy Ellenberger
+The artwork in the earlier part showed a natural and near perfect blend of the railroad with the natural background, kinda like it was always there.  Later works had shown some negative impacts that railroads were having to the land. - David Y.
 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
@@ Line 62: / Line 75: @@
 My dad actually works in the realm of workplace health and safety, so I found this section particularly interesting and was able to discuss some of it with him. I was somewhat surprised to find out he’d never heard of the Farwell v. Boston and Worcester Railroad case, since the reading discussed how significant the ruling was for workplace safety regulation (or rather, the lack thereof), but luckily regulations have improved quite a bit since the 1840s and there is no longer the concept of “assumption of risk” for agreeing to work at a company. - Noah Rutkowski
-Writing candidly, it is craazy to me how long work place injuries wen't dismissed by companies at large. Workers seem to be reduced for their physical abilities and were deemed responsible for their own injuries, which is a stark reminder of the consequences of technological advancements. - Ava B
+Writing candidly, it is crazy to me how long work place injuries wen't dismissed by companies at large. Workers seem to be reduced for their physical abilities and were deemed responsible for their own injuries, which is a stark reminder of the consequences of technological advancements. - Ava B
+Something that stuck out to me was McEvoy's discussion of pollution as a catalyst for and product of, technological change, and how that idea relates to the idea of the human body as a factor in the environmental makeup of a workplace. If a technology causes harm or injury to a worker, there then is often a change made to prevent that injury. That change often creates a new or different sort of injury, following which the cycle repeats. So on and so forth until the theoretical "perfect technology" is created. Likewise, technological change causes pollution, and that pollution prompts further change in a bid to make the antecedent cleaner, more efficient, or otherwise improved upon. - Abby Firestone
+I thought it was interesting how McEvoy connects the workplace with the environment and how he uses the environment to identify safety concerns. -Izzy Ellenberger
+McEvoy's work in this chapter had explained how Technology had an impact on environmental history.  McEvoy had mentioned that some environmental historians had avoid man made environments such as cities, since they were artificial, but he did mention how impactful it was and said: "it (technology) develops into a continual, reciprocal adaptation with the nature and social environments in which people use it. - David Y.
 ==== Document: Edison Bowers, "Is It Safe to Work?" ====
@@ Line 80: / Line 100: @@
 I hate how economic reasoning has shaped the pursuit of worker safety standards throughout history. Capitalism strikes again. - Callie H.
+Bowers talks about how accidents in the work place occur and that it is not solely because of individual mistakes but more of a problem withing the process of the workplace. He broadens the idea of safety beyond individual workers. -Izzy Ellenberger
+"Some employers will not make their plants safe because they fear that the expense involved will reduce profits." is the single quote here that stood out to me the most. In large part because in my own studies of major industrial accidents, this has been the primary cause. The Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire for example, is one of the largest industrial disasters in American history, and a large part of what went wrong that day was caused by inadequate safety measures and rules put in place by that factory owners. Similarly, the vast majority of nuclear accidents (of which i could talk for hours) are caused by faulty systems and a lack of consistent upkeep in accordance with code and regular safety conventions put in place by organizations like the NRC, simply because the upkeep is so expensive. As Callie said, capitalism strikes again. - Abby Firestone
+Bowers showed in his document about how injuries could affect the work that could be provided, claiming that injuries can cost many years of manpower.  The numbers he shared and the equivalent hours lost to injuries, along with some gruesome injuries, showed how bad injuries were and how unsafe they were. - David Y.
+Bower's explains the danger all this new technology caused in the railroads and factories. Many industrial fields with new technology was often unsafe and led to may deaths as working in these were unsafe. - Will Crane
 === How does this document relate to McEvoy's article? ===
@@ Line 92: / Line 121: @@
 I feel like both these articles relate to turning the workplace into more complex systems. Focusing a lot on the environment and key factors in it, and how the interaction between them can influence these accidents. - Justin H
 I thought both writers really emphasized the hopelessness of the nature of the industry as mechanization increased. And it helped highlight the biological impacts on workers as well as the societal mindsets of the employees and employers.  --James Clayberg
+Both McEvoy and Bowers cover the safety concerns of the workplace whether relying on different factors such as data, history, or the environment. -Izzy Ellenberger
+Both McEvoy's article and Bower's arguments bring up significant safety concerns as they relate to increasing industrialization, particularly in a society that may not be truly prepared. Both authors also seem to feel that workplace injury is an inevitable fact of technological change. - Abby Firestone
+What I noticed in McEvoy's article is how technology had to adapt to the changing environment of nature around, and since human beings are part of that environment, they too had to adapt to better use this technology to better their lives. - David Y.