Discussion Board Prompt: In this post, respond to the recorded lecture this week. How did the lectures help you to understand the course material differently? What questions do you have?
DO NOT USE ANY SOURCES EXCEPT ASSIGNED COURSE MATERIAL & COURSE LECTURES FOR THIS WEEK.
Initial posts must be 350–500 words and are due by end of day Friday.
LECTURES
Carolyn Ownbey, PhD (she/her)
00:01
All right, Folks uh this lecture is going to be on the essay that you read by Kathleen Arnold having to do with Carol Phillips foreigners three English lives.
00:12
Um! This right here on the left is a phone of Kathleen Arnold. Uh, this is our citation information here. The book is homelessness, citizenship, and identity, the uncannyiness of late modernity. For, uh, by Sunni Press. This is State University of New York Press
00:29
uh Peer reviewed academic press in two thousand and four. She doesn’t import uh doesn’t sound like It’s that long ago, maybe, but it’s a while, and I I can’t speak to ha um. If Arnold scholarship has remained, you know, along these lines, and she’s changed any of her ideas, any of that but
00:49
this is a peer-reviewed publication so it’s important that uh that you all know that.
00:54
Um, I will say Kathleen Arnold has a Phd. In political science. Um, and she’s a professor at de Paul University in Chicago, and is the director of the refugee. Forced migration studies, maybe refugee and force migration studies. Um sort of department there.
01:13
Um I’m, gonna provide you a number of quotes in this lecture, about eight quotes from the introduction of this book which you read for this week. I’m going to give you just a couple just two more quotes from later in the book. You did not have to read the whole book. I’m not assigning the whole book. Um, but I wanted to give you two quotes that I think are really really relevant to the Phillips
01:34
from later in this book. Um, which I have read. And so i’m going to give you that. So
01:39
let’s get to it here. Um, let me start with her opening. This is sort of how she opens the chapter. Let me read it.
01:48
More often than not. Homelessness is studied as a sociological problem, and the dynamics of power on the part of the homeless. On the one hand, and policymakers and full citizens on the other, are not examined.
02:00
It is tempting to engage the subject at the policy level in order to respond to homeless studies, recommendations, and policies. However, the politics of homelessness is a larger problem that reflects upon our society and the status of democracy rather than being a mere policy issue.
02:17
The forces that homeless people deal with are disenfranchisement and social quote death,
02:23
which is degrading myths and stereotypes, punitive treatment by case workers deficient school systems that perpetuate illiteracy and joblessness, and, most importantly, the loss of rights as a citizen. And thus, as a human, that these individuals suffer
02:39
when one can no longer inhabit public space, have one’s possessions and shanty towns home by some definitions, burned or bulldozed, be arrested for one’s status
02:49
rather than a crime, and signaling a loss of civil rights, the uh, and only exercise political power with extreme difficulty. One cannot be said to be a citizen.
03:00
There’s a lot to go on here, and one of the most common reactions I get from students when they’re reading. This uh has to do with with how she’s, she’s saying not to think about homelessness.
03:11
Um! And I think we’ll get to that in some of the later slides. But I want to foreground this that she’s not saying that. Um, you know, looking at, responding to homelessness, studies, recommendations and policies engaging in the subject at the policy level is
03:27
bad right. She’s saying that it’s not enough. What! What this essay, what this chapter is trying to do, and what the book at large is trying to do is add to the information that we have about homelessness about homeless people, and how we approach those ideas and those subjects because she’s saying, we’re not doing enough.
03:49
Um in this first blue section. Here you see, the dynamics of power are not examined right between homeless people and policymakers and full citizens. Now, power is something that certainly you can think of. You know policymakers have power over homeless people. That’s absolutely true. That seems really clear.
04:09
Well, full citizens, people who Aren’t homeless and are full. Citizens also have power over homeless people, and you might not see that, as
04:19
um you know, an individual. Oh, I have power over you. But the citizen, the full citizen who has a home, has power in ways that a homeless person does not. They have. They have different Um, you know, ways of engaging with the world that are more powerful than a person who is homeless.
04:38
Um! The other thing I want to point out here is, is this sort of section in this light blue color? Um. The politics of homelessness is a larger problem that reflects upon our society and the status of democracy rather than being a mere policy, issue the status of democracy.
04:56
Right? How democratic is our country when homelessness exists, the way that it does is a question that she is asking right? Um! And you know,
05:08
if you’re losing your rights as a citizen,
05:11
you know, if you’re losing your civil rights, are you part of that democracy. And if you’re not part of that democracy, how much does that democracy actually stand up?
05:20
All right, Let’s go to the next quote here
05:24
all right. And uh once again we’re gonna get to thinking about what she’s saying shouldn’t happen, and what should happen uh in these next few slides. Let me read this one.
05:34
The fact that the homeless have less agency than full citizens in the modern nation State is a political and not an individual problem. When certain individuals cannot occupy public space or many private commercial spaces because of their status, and when decisions are made for them under the guise of protection. Thus protection as coercion.
05:54
It is evident that homelessness is not a matter of bad luck or personal problems. Rather it is an issue that affects hundreds of thousands of people, and yet it has been treated academically, culturally and politically, as an individual problem.
06:08
Hence, although social or psychological studies, for example, may have value. It is worthwhile to explore the broader political and economic ramifications of homelessness.
06:18
Now, again, I’ve I’ve had students who sort of look at this and say, but homelessness can be a matter of bad luck and personal problems,
06:26
and I think Kathleen Arnold wouldn’t necessarily say that luck and personal problems have no place in whether or not someone is homeless. She is saying that
06:38
beyond that it also affects hundreds of thousands of people, so it can’t only be that if you are a person who has bad luck and personal problems. But you’re a wealthy person, for instance, with bad luck and personal problems, the likelihood that you will become homeless is much less so. We can’t just think about this in terms of bad luck and personal problems. We have to think about this in a larger scale what things contribute. We can’t just think about this on an individual level
07:08
level uh and she’s saying, You know academics, Uh, culturally and politically. That’s what we have done. We sort of ignored the larger, the broader which she says political and economic ramifications, instead of just focusing on the bad luck the personal problems, and she’s not saying that social and psychological studies which may deal with these things. Um
07:35
aren’t valuable. She says they may have value, but we need to look beyond those things, and that’s what her book is trying to do. Remember, this is an introduction to a scholarly monograph, which means that she is giving you
07:48
the setup. What is the rest of the book gonna talk about and gonna go into more detail on
07:55
All right next slide Here
07:57
the home both represents and transcends the concept of citizenship, and signifies autonomy. The ability to pursue long term goals maintain a social network and have some privacy. Politically it symbolizes a unitary subject, free of conflict and tension.
08:14
Homelessness in contrast can signify a focus on short-term pursuits, the absence of privacy the breakdown of social networks and the loss of autonomy in both private and political realms, where, in the latter case, even occupying space becomes illegal.
08:31
Now she’s giving us these descriiptions to to make this larger point right? It’s not just about whether you physically have a home or do not. It’s about these other things. It’s, you know the ability to pursue long term goals. That’s something that you can’t do when you’re in this situation of homelessness, where you then instead, have to focus on short term pursuits,
08:54
the question of privacy, right, and autonomy being able to make your own choices for your own life, these things really really
09:03
are are different. Uh, if you are someone who has a home, or if you are someone who is homeless,
09:10
All right, let’s go to the next slide here.
09:13
She says, the homeless are often seen as untrustworthy, dirty, lazy, pathological, and dangerous. Their condition is viewed as natural rather than political or economic. These attitudes, as manifested in various sites of political power, take the individual as the unit of analysis and structural factors are ignored.
09:33
Consequently the problem is depoliticized and reduced to a binary mode of self, other clean, dirty, responsible, irresponsible, and independent dependent.
09:43
This binary mode exposes an authoritarian power structure that has created an asymmetrical relation between the mainstream and the homeless, and thus citizen and non-citizen.
09:54
In effect, they are familiar. A familiar other a dirty, uncontrollable, broken down phantasm of the average mainstream citizen.
10:03
Now let’s look at this first part that I’ve highlighted in blue. These attitudes take the individual as the unit of analysis and structural factors are ignored. Once again the structural factors. Did you start out wealthy? Did you start out of someone with a You know large support network that could help you in this situation. Um!
10:25
Are there other factors, economic, political, et cetera, that come into play here?
10:31
And I think you know thinking about this in terms of what are some of the commonalities we see across the hundreds of thousands of people who are homeless in any given place or across across the world across the country. Right? Um! There’s a very high level of homelessness among veterans. What does that say? What can we learn from that? Certainly it’s not just that All veterans have some sort of,
10:55
you know, uh personal inmate character that makes them prone to this. There’s got to be something structural about how veterans are treated when they come home. The same could be said about various uh minority communities that that figure highly in uh homeless communities. Things like this we need to sort of look at the structural factors.
11:14
Um! How the system sets people up
11:18
to become homeless, and and Arnold is saying that there’s this power structure right in an authoritarian power structure that creates this what she calls asymmetrical relation.
11:31
And think. Think about this in terms of that dynamic of power she mentioned in that first side, the dynamic of power between people who are homeless, and people who make the policies between the people who are homeless, and people who aren’t homeless, or wouldn’t be in danger of becoming homeless.
11:48
This power structure is really important to sort of keep in mind that it’s not just down to,
11:55
you know personal choices. It really is about the system. Uh, in a certain way, in addition to personal choices. Right? If you’re in in a part of the system where you might be vulnerable to being homeless. And then you make this choices, or then you encounter that bad luck or tragedy, or whatever. Then, sure um! You might become
12:16
homeless in a way that someone
12:18
who isn’t in your same position might not
12:22
structural factors very important.
12:24
All right. Next quote here in the case of the homeless, they are either integrated into the welfare system in order to become rehabilitated. So it is tempted to zoom the other into the same,
12:35
or subjected to arrests or police harassment. When this does not work, they are bus to another city forced out to urban campgrounds, or simply compelled to move on.
12:46
Similarly, immigrants are expected to assimilate or become the object of suspicion.
12:51
Deportation looms behind either choice. Thus the power matrix that these homeless people fall into is no longer democratic. Rather it reflects the exercise of rocket of power in that it is punitive and disciplinary,
13:06
and ultimately treats these people, not as citizens the political recognition of an individual as a human being, but as subhumans deprived of political status.
13:16
Now, in the first part of this we get the sort of two choices right there uh homeless people are integrated into the welfare system to become rehabilitated or subjected to this this power uh police power getting moved on um, et cetera.
13:32
And then in the second part, we’re talking about this power matrix again. Right? That authoritarian power matrix. Now you may have noticed in this last sentence, Right. It reflects the exercise of prerogative power,
13:44
and there it is, punitive and disciplinary, and ultimately treat these people, not as citizens, but as subhumans. This is relying actually on some of the ideas of Michelle Fuko that we’ve talked about previously. When she says disciplinary, she’s invoking for quote she means flu, code and discipline.
14:02
Accordion is the adjective that we use for him. Lord knows why.
14:06
Um so, and she’s connecting that to the idea of democracy, right if we’re living in a um place where punitive disciplinary power is used against one category of people. Um, because they do not have a home. Well, that’s not democratic, and her figuring of it
14:25
she also um brings the idea of immigrants
14:30
in here Right? We’re not just talking about people who are physically without a home, a house somewhere to live. We’re also talking about people for whom home that idea of home was somewhere else, for and now they have immigrated here. And um! How how do they have to deal with it? That is another um element of what she’s doing in this book is connecting those ideas and thinking about the similarities in those positions
14:55
he or she uh, gets more into that. The immigrant suggests a type of homelessness or radical otherness against which inclusion in the national family is conceived.
15:06
As the national community has largely replaced the functions of smaller communities from the past. The political power invested in citizenship is crucial to survive
15:16
right? So she’s. She’s really thinking about. Um what it means to be a citizen, and to therefore have civil rights that are protected, and what it means to be excluded from that right against which inclusion is conceived just thinking about who is included? And how does that have an effect on their legal status right their citizenship.
15:41
She’s also, uh giving us some ideas for how we might start to think differently about this. She says Here I suggest that a more fluid notion of home would unsettle fixed and bounded notions of home while allowing the homeless, greater autonomy in certain respects, for example,
16:00
a broader definition of home allows for the recognition that personal belongings and certain key relationships, such as family, are also part of the home. Given this expanded definition burning a homeless individuals possessions would be no more acceptable than incinerating the belongings of a housed person.
16:18
So she’s trying to expand this notion and think we’re broadly about the idea of home than we do right. Um! The way that that homeless people’s belongings are treated, for instance, in sweeps in in these moments where um, you know, police will come through and take their possessions and burn them.
16:37
She’s saying that shouldn’t be acceptable, and it’s not acceptable for people who have what we now think of as a home. So if we expand our idea of what counts as home, maybe that would provide some protection there.
16:52
Alright, the last quote from what you read. She says: This most policy, research and public attitudes toward the homeless have been based on a paradigm that does not account for the complexity of the situation, nor the diversity of the homeless population.
17:07
This construction of the other invokes binary modes of operation, deserving and deserving responsibility responsible, and focuses on individual pathologies which serve to classify individuals and turn them into bureaucratic cases.
17:21
Now this no part, this to serving into serving responsibility. Responsible. She’s talked about quite a bit already in these quotes. But um! I want to focus on the sort of
17:30
part in blue, and then the very end to lead us into the other quotes that I have here. So once again, she says, most policy, research and public attitudes are based on a paradigm that doesn’t account for the complexity of the situation.
17:43
Right? She’s not saying that we should throw all of those out that they have nothing to contribute to this conversation, and to how we address homelessness. But she’s saying they’re not accounting for how complex it is,
17:57
or for the fact that the homeless population is made up of people in a lot of different situations coming from a lot of different communities, and we should look at how those things are intertwined and affected um to put these people in the situation, and and we should
18:13
be thinking of that complexity in that diversity when we are thinking about solutions.
18:18
All right now. The last part um individual pathologies is where I want to start here. Um.
18:26
These serve to classify individuals and turn them into bureaucratic cases. Now, thinking of the Carol Phillips foreigners the part that you read um Northern Lights, which really focuses in a large way on homelessness on a homeless man, David. All the wallet,
18:44
he becomes a bureaucratic case in a lot of ways, and the way that the narrative is laid out shows us that it’s giving us all these pieces of bureaucracy and mission records, or you know all of these little little pieces. And so with that in mind, I want to. I want to share with you two quotes from later in this book in Kathleen Arnold’s book,
19:06
Um, here’s the first one. Almost individuals are treated as criminals
19:10
and subjected to a prerogative power, just as foreign enemies are on the one hand, or individuals needing guidance, such as children and the insane on the other.
19:20
Thus policy and attitudes towards the homeless, have placed them in a web of domination and objectification, despite the goals of early Liberal writers, such as Hobbes and Locke, to achieve political, if not economic equality.
19:34
And when she says the word liberal here, she does not mean liberal in the sense that we often talk about it today. Um, these are not, you know, sort of,
19:42
let’s say Democrats Uh, in common parlance, liberal is this is coming from the nineteenth century meaning of the term Hobbes unlock our political philosophers. Um. And Liberalism
19:55
is something something very different. But thinking about, you know, Liberalism, is it about in some ways um equality in some ways sort of
20:06
um as hard term to to define. This is just not what you’re thinking of today is is mainly what I want to say, What I want to focus on is not that in this quote I want to focus on
20:17
um these these two ways that homeless individuals are treated as criminals or as individuals, needing guidance, such as the insane
20:28
David. All the way in the story, is treated as both of these at different times right the Times, where he sent to the um
20:36
to the asylum um versus the times when he’s put in prison,
20:41
and you can see the different voices in that section of Northern Lights sort of giving you
20:48
both of those giving you some people who are calling him a criminal. Some people who are calling him, you know, a dullard, or you know he he has mental health problems, et cetera,
20:59
and David all. Wally, therefore, ends up in what’s called a web of domination and objectification. He’s dominated by those police officers. He’s objectified by them, and also by the nurses in the asylum, the doctors in the asylum
21:15
and he’s he’s in this. He’s caught in this web, and, you know, unable to get out of it in a certain sense.
21:21
Last quote here.
21:23
Um, I I think it’s just uncanny when I read this uh compared to Northern Light. So let me read this one rather than meet out a punishment to a criminal. A judge prescribes a treatment and assesses the normality of the individual.
21:36
In doing this the judge must rely on a whole network of experts, psychiatrists, criminologists, educators, doctors in order to evaluate the individuals, pathologies and corridors.
21:49
This part in blue
21:51
is so much exactly what is happening in Northern Lights, particularly in the section on the trial. The section that’s really specific about the trial. I think that’s pages two hundred and eight to two hundred and thirty in the Phillips,
22:04
where the judge is relying on a whole network of experts. Right? We hear from doctors. We hear from the main psychiatrist of the asylum. We hear from all of these other people from police officers, et cetera, in order to evaluate David, all Wallace pathologies and corridors,
22:22
and we also do that ourselves. Throughout the whole chapter. The whole chapter is putting together this network of experts, but it’s expanding that circle of who counts as an expert. It’s not just the psychiatrists, the doctors, the criminologists. It’s also people who knew David, all the Wallet
22:40
people who encountered him in various ways. They were people who knew him from from Lagos. There are people who um worked with him or their people, who, you know, went to the pub and danced with him,
22:54
et cetera. Those people are also included in the way that Phillips writes that that section of the novel. So let’s uh wrap up this lecture, and we’ll get to to the novel in the next lecture.
Carolyn Ownbey, PhD (she/her)
00:00
All right, folks. This is going to be the lecture on Carol Phillips Corners three English lives, the last section Northern Lights. Now, before we get directly to this. I wanted just to remind you of a few things from the Kathleen Arnold that you read
00:15
uh particularly. We excuse me in the last couple of quotes that I provided to you, where she talks about a whole network of experts coming together to determine a homeless person’s, you know, corrid ability and the web of domination and a homeless person finds themselves in. I think you’re gonna find those
00:32
um Those comments to be particularly applicable here to David all the wallet, the main sort of figure in Northern Lights.
00:40
Um! I’ll also remind you that we’re looking at this book. Go back here, foreigners, three English lives which we talked a little bit about being maybe sort of an anthology, right? It’s collecting these three men who have a lot to do with each other right there. Three black men in Britain who all die very tragic deaths, largely because these systems and structures have failed them in a lot of ways.
01:05
I sort of set them up for failure. We had Francis Barber. We have Randy Turpin, and so thinking about how all three of these men are both foreign and also English, and how those things go together is really important. It’s also important, I think, to think about the distinctions between them.
01:21
Um. Where they were born. Right. Um. We had Francis Barbara born in the Caribbean randy, Turpin, born in England, and now we have David Al Wallay, who’s born in Nigeria from Lagos.
01:34
Uh. And when we think about those three areas, remember what I talked about in terms of the black Atlantic, the black diaspora, and what it might mean to be black and British.
01:43
How how does that all work together?
01:46
I’ll also mention. There are some things that Carol Phillips didn’t include about all of these men. If you were to read a full biography of any one of these three men, Francis Barber, Brandy, Turpin, or David all the wallet. This isn’t the story that you would get you would get something else as one example. David Alawali was married.
02:06
We never hear that in the story, and it’s one of the ways that he was actually similar to the other two men, Francis Barber and Wendy, Turpin. All three of these men were married to white women. Specifically, that’s important. Why does that get left out of this last section? Why, isn’t that here?
02:23
So thinking on that, I also want to think about the narration. Um, in Northern Lights in particular, Remember, narration is not just the story, but how that story is told, and in this case how we piece it together.
02:39
It’s always what’s happening. We’re always piecing together a story. But in this section you really need to do that. There’s a lot of work you need to put in to be able to piece it together and find out what’s what? Why is it put together this way
02:52
there is somewhere between seventy-three and seventy-four sections of this chapter. Um, depending on how you split them up. Uh I typically say there’s seventy-three separate sections. One of them is just a little confusing. Um, and those are those are actually split into three different kinds of narration.
03:11
Let me break this down first. We have what i’m going to call the main narrator.
03:15
Second, we have what i’m calling substantial first-person entries and third we have shorter evidentiary entries. Let me let me get more specific about each of these. So the main narrator shows up a bunch of times. This is sort of the carol Phillips figure. If Carol Phillips are writing himself, or writing a first person. Narrator: into this
03:35
chapter into Northern Lights. This is this is the one that that main narrator. This is the voice that gives us the historical accounts, for instance, of the city of Leeds.
03:45
It’s also the one that gives us this first person account of leads of saying, You know i’m standing here looking at what was the pub? I’m standing here looking at this house. Um, that first person account that one
03:59
is um is the same main narrator i’m talking about, and then the direct address, the second person, the voice that says to David, all the while, you you that voice also I attribute to this main narrator. This main narrator is not a character We don’t know anything about them.
04:17
Um, but they are speaking to us in the first person, or giving us historical account. There’s there’s a sort of main narrator figure
04:25
next. We had the substantial first person and trees besides that one. These are all character narrators, and this is important to distinguish these. All are people. We learn something about them. In addition to learning something about about David, all wallet there’s nine of these
04:43
Um. And I should have, said the main narrator, that I talked about above accounts for about thirty of the seventy-three sections. So quite a bit These substantial uh more substantial first-person entries Um, take up about eighteen of those seventeen section seventy-three sections. Excuse me, eighteen of the seventy-three sections
05:02
there’s nine separate narrators. A few of them have more than one entry,
05:06
so we get the fourteen year old girl who opens up
05:10
the the section. The first voice you hear is that fourteen year old girl who’s maybe speaking to the main narrator speaking to someone who’s interviewing her right
05:25
sort of leads the Commonwealth Citizens Committee. She’s sort of an activist. This white woman. She actually has seven entries. It’s the most of any of the rest of these seven entries that’s a lot.
05:35
Get the West Yorkshire foundry personnel officer, just one entry
05:40
a still away in one thousand nine hundred and fifty, one also just one entry,
05:44
a former asylum patient. One entry:
05:48
There’s two police officers. I’ve just listed them here as number one and number two. Um. Let’s let’s label number one. The one who talks about his parents a lot. His dad was a police officer, and it’s really disappointed in him and all of that. That’s police Officer number one,
06:02
we might be able to guess that that’s Gareth Galvin. So when we hear about only in the third person. But he was one of the police officers we know who testified against um, the police officers who who murder David all the wallet.
06:18
Um, We also get this police officer Number two, and this one i’m gonna say is the one who always talks about how young he was. I was so young, and he’s the one who witnesses actually a lot of the direct brutality. First one didn’t didn’t witness very much direct brutality. The second one does second. One tells us I was driving the van. When they did this. I watched them. I you know that that sort of thing,
06:42
and this one we we actually can track is Pc. Keith Seeker keep secret because he talks about uh in his testimony that we read from the trial portion. He talks about driving the van or or someone else, I think, talks about him driving the band, but nonetheless
06:57
two police officers who importantly have both left the forest.
07:02
Then we get a West Community leader um, and a friend from Lagos. Um, I will say. Both of the police officers also have two entries each, not including um. If they were testifying in the trial, they have these sections that are first person. Seems like they’re being interviewed, maybe, by the main narrator.
07:20
And finally, there’s the remaining twenty five. So So
07:25
the main narrator was thirty. The longer substantial first person entries was eighteen, and now these shorter entries, the shorter evidentiary entries. These are all um sort of put in, usually in the trial, or just in little little bits and pieces. Little evidence.
07:42
Um! That you might say either people giving statements, testifying in the trial, or things like, as you can see over here admissions discharge records, memos, even graffiti
07:53
things like this. There are twenty-five sections that are like this. Um, and a couple of them are repeated. So there’s twenty-three unique sources here.
08:04
It’s It’s a lot right. How do we piece that all together into a single story,
08:09
And yet at the same time. I bet you all have a pretty At least you have an idea of what happens with Steven and the wallet, and and why it happened. Um, there’s there’s a lot to say there,
08:23
so let us now get to
08:27
David Lloyd himself, born in one thousand nine hundred and thirty, died, of course, was murdered in one thousand nine hundred and sixty-nine, so he was thirty-nine years old, not an old man here’s a photo of him.
08:40
Now I’m going to go through um a whole number of things today. Essentially, I want to cover
08:47
a couple of legal topics. Um, and I want to get into one of the things that the trial section is doing. Of course we’re thinking about law and literature, seeing a trial put into the the novel here really important, uh, really really right for analysis.
09:04
So this this book covers a ton of topics. It covers obviously homelessness. It covers
09:12
labor, child labor, slavery. It touches on a lot a lot of subjects on working conditions on um social welfare, all sorts of stuff it touches, for instance, on citizenship immigration, right all the while he arrives and is in prison because he’s going to stow away on a ship.
09:31
Uh, He also says, this i’m from a British colony, and I’m British right. He is insisting throughout the whole
user avatar
Unknown Speaker
09:39
Um.
user avatar
Carolyn Ownbey, PhD (she/her)
09:40
We had the whole chapter book, whatever that he is British. He’s from a British colony, and so he doesn’t understand why they call him the unwar. He doesn’t understand why he doesn’t belong, why he’s an accepted
09:55
citizenship, and belonging, if you’re interested in my other class, are really with the forefront here as well. This was said by the um! So away from one thousand nine hundred and fifty-one
10:04
we also get to examine policing
10:07
right policing in the Uk. Specifically policing in leads really clearly Um!
10:15
And and think about about our approaches. Right? Think about our approaches to long literature. Think about how we can analyze the institution of policing the the system of policing. Let me give you a few examples of that.
10:29
There’s a quote from the fourteen year old girl. I haven’t written it on the slides. But i’ll always tell you what who these areas are. This is that fourteen year old girl who opens up the um the chapter, and she says this: we knew which houses had sellers we could dive into, dive into and hide,
10:46
and nobody ever knew what we’d done, or what we were doing. But we couldn’t take this rebellious, this back into our homes. It really was like being two people
10:53
once out of my school, called me in and asked me if I would meet with the police. As they were trying to become more community oriented,
11:00
I went home and told my sister, and she looked at me and said, No way, absolutely not. So I had to go back to school and tell the headmaster. No, the police were trying to mend the community, but they’d already shown their hand and done something which let us know that our community didn’t matter to them.
11:15
That was how they felt about us. We’d always known it, but now we knew for sure we had evidence.
11:21
So here’s one piece of evidence, let’s say about how policing works in this community works in Leeds. This is the fourteen year old girl after David Lloyd has been murdered, saying,
11:35
No, we Don’t believe that the police are trying to actually become more community oriented and trying to mend with the community instead. We know what they are like. So this is this is one view, right? We don’t just get one view of anything. In this chapter. We get a lot of use, and it’s our job as a reader of this, to triangulate right to sort of take this
11:57
and analyze. What are we supposed to take out of all of this? How do we look at something with all of these different angles, and come up with a reading on that system. The system of policing, as it happened in leads in that sort of mid century period. Right? The S.
12:16
Here’s another angle.
12:17
Okay, So this um is our police officer Number one, the police officer. His dad was a police officer as well. He says this:
12:28
the business people, cafe owners, restaurant owners, shop owners. They all regarded the police as people who could do no wrong,
12:35
and the police were fiercely proud of this, and so there was a very strong feeling that the police were there to serve the incumbent business people.
12:42
I’d be funded quite a few cafe owners, you know, people that you could go and chat to. And who made you feel that you were part of the community
12:49
Now, in the daytime that was all very nice, and it was all very cozy in the night it was a different place. The streets were deserted. People had gone home, and the police. What were they to do? What was their job then?
13:00
Well, it was to check property
13:03
on my patch. I befriended quite a few dossers, and I used to go and chat to them. There was a T stall in the open market, which may or may not still be operating, and it used to open at about five in the morning, and I would always drop in,
13:15
and you get a mixed bunch of people, and they accepted me.
13:18
I used to take my hat off and chat with them. In fact, one officer said that I had the attitude of a social worker to the job, which was not thought to be a good thing.
13:27
This is a totally different vantage point, right? It’s not the fourteen year old girl. It is now one of those police officers, but it is a police officer who’s left the force, and he’s giving you this insight into it into how the police could be part of the community of community. With whom is the question?
13:45
At the top, You see, they could be in community with the business people, the owners, the cafe, restaurant, and shop owners, all of the police, were in community with them, and they were there, as it says, to serve them right to check the property.
14:00
But then this officer tries to also be in community with the quote, Dossers end quote right, The homeless people and the people who are at the t stall at five in the morning. It’s a mixed bunch, and he feels accepted.
14:14
And of course, that last line right. One officer said that I had the attitude of a social worker to the job, which was not thought to be a good thing that tells us something about the institution of policing right. The institution that how it how it works and needs is that
14:28
these Aren’t social workers, they’re not there to support society. They’re there to check property, to protect property, to protect property from those wealthier owners, the cafe, restaurant, and shop owners.
14:44
We give you another quote here. It gives us a little bit more
14:49
on on the police. This is the other police officer. Um, presumably seeker Keith seeker
14:56
um, and this is about Larker and Kitchen. The two police officers who were convicted of um, essentially murdering David Ella Wallace,
15:06
Inspector, and Sergeant Kitchen had a fascination for David. He says
15:11
it says in the next page. Eller Current Kitchen always wanted to find him, but if I saw David I did not report that i’d seen him.
15:17
This is the only good thing. I did
15:19
so. I think that in some ways, by always coming back he was actually just being courageous and not letting them have what they wanted.
15:26
I was inside the van when they didn’t have a go at him, and it was terrible. It was just unbelievable, absolutely dreadful. I was driving man.
15:34
I remember when they were hitting him they were very careful not to hit his face, because then there would be no evidence. When they went into the court.
15:41
They had ways of doing stuff, and the ethos of rank was very, very strong. Some of the police officers at that time had come in from the army, and they were what was known as old school.
15:51
They were people who had been sergeants or private, or whatever I can’t say for definite, but I believe that Kenneth Kitchen had been somebody who’d come in that way. He was an older man.
16:01
My experience was that a young Pc. Could not approach a senior officer for any reason you would only take orders, and that was the job to take orders and not ask questions.
16:11
So this is the other man who is a police officer who is speaking clearly from a position of guilt. Right? This is the only good thing I did, he says. Um, but he’s highlighting
16:23
what happened right? He’s highlighting this this moment the second moment in blue. They were careful not to hit his face, so there wouldn’t be evidence when they went to court. You’re expecting to go to court.
16:35
What does that tell us about how the institution, how that system of policing is working? Um in this moment,
16:43
and that first police officer, also Gareth Galvin, possibly one with his dad being a police officer. Um tells us what what happened after um, David all I was killed, and I think that’s important to context for us to read. He says this. We heard about it at the station, obviously,
16:59
and I remember at the time that when the other police officers talked about it, they didn’t talk about it as a tragedy. It was talked about as the balloon’s gone up, you know. It’s out now. Is that kind of conversation
17:10
it wasn’t talked about from the point of view of David all his position at all. It was just, you know. Oh, well, we’re in for trouble now, sort of thing.
17:18
My father didn’t want to know. He would hear nothing setting against the police force, so I got no support there.
17:24
My relationship with my father went back down. Hell! I called again, and I was very confused about the situation. I was feeling isolated, and I was also thinking about David’s isolation. I found myself thinking a lot about what had happened to him, and since then I’ve had these flashbacks about that.
17:39
The worst feeling of all is that the tragedy was predictable, and no one, including myself, prevented it. Obviously I left the police force. When I went to the court I met some other officers who had had left the force as well, and he’d been giving evidence, so I realized that it wasn’t alone. I had a feeling of guilt then, and I’ve got it now. We shouldn’t have let it happen.
17:58
So now we’re getting that previous police officer. We’re getting that guilt reinforced here right? The worst feeling ball is that it was predictable. No one prevented it. Um! And that no one was looking from the point of view of David Alloy’s position.
18:15
They were just looking from the sort of um you know police position, and from the all we’re in trouble now. Position
18:23
Uh, shortly after he says this this police officer says I didn’t know what had happened on the night David died, but I thought that there must have been other police officers around at the time.
18:32
There wouldn’t have been just two of them, so I wondered about that
18:36
it’s important that this is coming from the mouth of one of the former police officers, because we see throughout the chapter and throughout the trial they’s really focused on and kitchen, and they are very much um
18:49
sort of at fault here. But this gives us a little bit more insight into the system. Not just the two men, but the system, and how it is built to sort of allow this sort of thing to happen, so that it was predictable Right? He called it predictable
19:08
one last um section here that i’m going to give you on the idea of the police force. Uh, this is the his hysterical Excuse me, the historical narrator, that main narrator speaking in that historical voice.
19:20
They say this in one thousand eight hundred and thirty-six the Lee’s police force had been formed, and shortly there, after they were armed with cutlasses and heavy batons. It was understood the police were obliged to defend the rights of the mill owners, and prevent the mobs from attacking the mills, and soon after the establishment of the police force, their numbers and powers were extended, in order that they might deal effectively with growing working class resentment
19:42
in one thousand eight hundred and forty-seven. A new bro jail was constructed at armley to cope with vagrants and other undesirables, and during this period of rapid urban growth the wealthier citizens quickly learned that they must vigorously monitor at the under classes, for these people were not under any circumstances to be allowed to gain the upper hand.
20:01
This is the history, and I want to just give you two dates that I think are important to think of here
20:08
one thousand eight hundred and thirty-six. The Leeds police force was formed.
20:13
Do you know what happened three years prior to this
20:16
in one thousand eight hundred and thirty-three, one thousand eight hundred and thirty three is the year that slavery was abolished in the uk
20:24
equivalent in some senses, without the war to the Emancipation Proclamation in the United States,
20:31
and the institution of policing did not exist until three years after that
20:37
Why,
20:39
one thousand eight hundred and forty-seven. When the new jail was was constructed to cope with the vagrants and undesirable and During this period of rapid urban growth, the wealthier citizens got concerned uh another another date. I’ll give you one thousand eight hundred and forty-five. Two years before this jail was constructed One thousand Eight hundred and forty-five
20:58
was the Irish potato. Famine goes on until, I think, one thousand eight hundred and fifty, one or so, the potato famous. There is a mass influx of Irish immigrants.
21:07
During this period. They were the the major sort of uh group coming into England at this at this point, particularly right at this point.
21:19
How is that important here.
21:20
Our narrator does not tell us that that’s left for us to deduce.
21:25
But
21:26
what does that tell us?
21:28
Irish immigrants are mentioned? I will say, at different points by this historical narrator, not here,
21:34
but one thousand eight hundred and thirty-six, the lead, the leads police forces formed one thousand eight hundred and forty-seven. A new borough jail was constructed, and why we get reinforced for us here that the police were defending the rights of the owners.
21:46
Now it’s not restaurants, cafes, and shops. It’s mill owners. But that’s still tracks right. That still tracks to what that police officer had told us. The understanding was, Why are they there to protect properties
21:58
and to deal with what the working class essentially um the under classes right that are not supposed to be allowed to be in the upper hand.
22:09
All of this sort of comes together in in giving us a picture of what is the system and institution of policing? Why does it exist? How does it work?
22:20
Right? Giving us all these little little clues about it? These This is not it. Of course there’s a lot more about police and policing in the chapter. Um, but these are just some clues that can help us to triangulate around it. And if we were to study policing, for instance, in this
22:36
section in this chapter Northern Lights we could have a lot of different um ways to look at how the system works both explicitly like I’ve shown you here, and also looking at other elements of this chapter sort of assessing out what it means.
22:50
All right.
22:51
Next, I want to give you um two quotes that. Um i’m going to sort of think about the idea of incarceration um in prisons and incarceration in asylum together.
23:05
But I want in these next two slides to really think about. Why, these seventy-three sections, and how do they link together? How do they work together?
23:15
In this first quote we have um four separate narrators here this top one it continued from before. Um, but that was the um stowaway speaking the next one right here. Excuse me this one right here is the white woman speaking.
23:33
Um! This one here is, of course, one of the shorter evidentiary entries. They uh enuck Powell uh! He is famous for giving a speech that is known as the rivers of blood speech, which is
23:44
horribly racist and xenophobic. Uh, if you’re interested, you can look that up. And then this last one. Here is our main historical narrator giving us the history of the West Riding proper lunatic asylum.
23:58
Okay, So we’ve got these four different narrators. Please excuse my cat, and he’s yelling in the other room. He’s fine. He just wants attention. If you can’t hear that, just imagine a cat screaming from the other room. So let me read this page and think about. Why are we getting all these different angles? What are we trying to see here.
24:17
Okay. So we start with the stowaway. We knew that the police were against us because we could see it, and we had to work around that, but not David. He was determined. He never discussed his ambitions or any idea of going back to Nigeria. But then again, the majority of us didn’t want to go back to Africa again
24:34
than the white woman.
24:35
And then David just disappeared, and that was that at first nobody thought it was unusual, for we were used to people leaving or just moving on. But after a while I remember asking people anybody seen David,
24:47
and then I was told, didn’t you hear he’s been arrested
24:51
a lot of my own work with the Chapel Town Commonwealth Citizens Committee involved having to deal with the police, who are very much in the habit of picking up people just because they were colored.
24:59
The word on the street was that one night, while walking home and minding his own business. David had been arrested, and he’d been sent to Armley jail. I thought, Okay, this is not good, but I suppose we’ll see him when he comes out, but we never did. He just disappeared
25:14
Then the quote from you know
25:17
they There they stand, majestic, imperious, brooded over by the gigantic water tower and chimney combined, rising unmistakable and daunting, out of the countryside. V. A silence which our forefathers build with such solidity. The Right Honorable Jay Munich Powell, minister of health, one thousand nine hundred and sixty-one.
25:36
From what we know about about this,
25:39
you know Asylums health question. Mark
25:43
one thousand nine hundred and sixty, one
25:45
all right. And finally our historical narrator follows that up, saying, You can see it from the road. A large Gothic building in the sprawling state of outbuildings, built in one thousand eight hundred and eighty-eight. This is a deeply depressing complex, the West riding copper lunatic asylum, a place of Grim Victorian nightmares set in two hundred acres of land.
26:05
Once you turn off the road and pass the sign that reads Treatment center. The gloom deepens another side. We sign reads: welcome to Hyroids Hospital,
26:13
the asylum.
26:15
Thereafter the sheer scale of the place soon becomes apparent. The buildings begin to multiply, and it is clear that High Roy’s hospital, as it became known in in one thousand nine hundred and sixty-three, is the size of a village
26:26
In its Heyday over two thousand people could be quote, treated, and quote at any one time in the dark stone buildings which, huddled together beneath the sinister turrets and towers, lights are burning in the windows. There’s nobody in sight. Imagine inside.
26:41
So these are four very, very different narratives. Right?
26:45
Very different narratives we see. The first one is this person who also stood away from Nigeria, who, saying, We didn’t want to go back right? We didn’t want to go back and and
26:59
that that is okay. He’s sort of justifying that. Um! And then we have the white woman who says just disappeared. He went to jail, but he just disappeared,
27:09
and then we get these two bits on the silence very different. The first one, you know, Powell, who’s saying, Oh, they’re majestic, right majestic, daunting their asylums, which are forefathers built with such solidity.
27:26
That’s positive right. He thinks that they’re you know, absolutely majestic that our forefathers built them,
27:33
whereas this narrator at the bottom is calling it grim Victorian nightmares. It’s not our fourth fathers. It’s these grim Victorian nightmares. It’s depressing
27:44
right, and we know
27:46
from other portions of this Se. This chapter that um what happens right. We don’t have it said explicitly. Here, right? He went to Armley Jail.
27:59
He he should come out. He doesn’t what happens? He gets transferred to Thyroid’s Hospital to this formerly West Riding. Proper lunatic asylum,
28:11
right?
28:12
And and so these these different narratives put next to each other, give us a totally, You know different story. It’s not saying he was sent there, and this is what it’s like. It’s telling us
28:24
he disappeared. We know what that means. We know he was sent to the asylum. It’s telling us this is what the official Minister of Health thinks about it that this is good. And here’s what it’s really like, really awful.
28:38
We get to put these things together in our minds and create a picture of what happened, of how things were for David. All the wallet.
28:46
One more section where i’m going to give you three different um narrators. This first one here is the main narrator. Um
28:55
that sort of historical voice that Carol Phillips speaker, the second one, is his uh admission record to the asylum, and then the third one is that other asylum patient, a white man who is an asylum patient. So let me start at the top
29:10
with that main narrator. The disenfranchised of leads, were refusing to go anywhere. They insisted on being heard, and they demanded that they be allowed to participate. They would not disappear. Nobody disappears. People, Don’t just disappear
29:23
surname all the way. Christian name David Unit number twenty-seven, twenty-six status. Informal. Address: Nfa. Sex mail, marital status single admitted from St. James’s Hospital, Beckett Street leads nine town hall leads to
29:39
date of birth, eight, eight, thirty religion, c. Slash, E. National insurance, number Zk, forty-five o three, sixty c. Admitted eleven six fifty-three section twenty-six status c certified
29:55
Let me have the asylum patient. I never saw him, and I never knew him. But it’s a big place, massive, in fact, I never saw no color people at all. But then again, it’s difficult because of the drugs they affect your memory the medication, as like they, as like they call they like to call it. It can make you screen.
30:11
And then they just look at you, and that’s when they remind you that you’re mad
30:15
and that you will not be going anywhere, I would find myself walking up and down corridors, talking to myself, thinking, Who the hell is this crazy bastard in my head? And then, before I knew what was happening the nurses would be all over me, holding me down, forcing more stuff down my throat.
30:30
Okay, So at the top,
30:32
right, we we have the narrator talking about the disenfranchised of needs, saying that they insisted on being there. That sounds very much like David. He insists on being there. They would not disappear. Nobody disappears. People don’t disappear, but we know
30:46
that all while I quote disappears from what that that previous you know section from the white woman, she said. Then he just disappeared.
30:55
And how does he disappear? Here’s the admission record. He didn’t disappear. He disappeared into this place, and then we get the first person account of what it was like to be a patient there,
31:09
and there’s more on that right. This this asylum patient says. I used to wish I was back in prison because you have more freedom in prison. Also they don’t give you medication in there, so you don’t twitch as much, and there’s less nightmare.
31:21
He also says
31:22
this way. It is better when he gets sort of moved into a different um portion of of the asylum. This place is better, but i’d still rather have been in only jail, because there you definitely knew about time, and you’ve got your wits about you, but it’s hopeless. Once they put you in the loony Ben, it’s hopeless trying to hang on to anything
31:40
before you know what’s going on. They turn you into a bloody zombie, and there’s nobody to talk to.
31:44
I got called into the doctor’s office, and he told me that I was going to be discharged. I said nothing because I didn’t believe him.
31:50
Then I realized that I didn’t want to go, because I didn’t have any connection with the world anymore. Not since i’d gone down the drain pipe and then dragged back again. I didn’t know anybody. I didn’t know anything about life out there, and it was frightening to me.
32:04
We get all of this, and this is the narrative that immediately follows. You know David Ella Walley’s admission record. We don’t get David all the wall. His narration of being in there.
32:14
We don’t get one of those nurses giving us a long, you know. First person narration like we get this man.
32:22
How is that telling you the story.
32:24
You still understand that what this man’s experience was probably is likely similar to what happened to all the walleye, except all the Wallace was probably worse because he was a black man.
32:35
Right
32:37
uh you start to see
32:39
how they these, you know, different pieces come together, and we know, of course, that um David was hoping to return to his home when he comes out when he’s told your discharge; but as this man says, you know he didn’t have any connection with the world anymore coming back out,
32:58
and David on the wallet
33:00
didn’t have any connection with the world anymore.
33:03
Right? He! He doesn’t have this home when he comes out he’s in that asylum for eight years.
33:12
Any case this is how we can start to put together. The story is looking at. How these things add up. What do we believe? What do we believe is true? Do we believe that the asylum’s majestic, like Powell said, or do we believe that it’s a place that’s really traumatic to go into, where they drug you into into insanity, into oblivion?
33:31
And they are violent with you that that asylum patient talks about the nurses being very, very physically violent, and and um that sort of thing as well.
33:43
All right. Let me know. Switch t to talk about the trial. Okay, the trial is spoken about very directly. What constitutes the trial sort of covers pages two hundred and eight to two hundred and thirty. This is how it opens. The trial concerning the death of David. All in wallet took place in November, one thousand nine hundred and seventy-one
34:01
very clear opening. This is where it starts, and we get this main historical narrator giving us the story and that voice is sort of peppered throughout, and then we get all of these other bits and pieces of evidence right? We get little little entries, we get records, we get testimonies and things like this
34:21
we also get
34:23
um This sentence and the following: At the trial the defendants lawyers sought to characterize David all the wallet.
34:31
Now remember, David O’wali is not on trial here. David Holley’s murderers are on trial here, and yet the victim, David, is being characterized. Okay, to characterize him. This is British spelling, because it is a British Uk book. Um, forgive me for them
34:49
so to characterize him, but
34:52
we only get a really limited amount of characterizing him right here. What it, what it the the lawyers say. This is a long one. This is a really really long one, but this is how they characterize him. And I’m going to read this, but I want you to to focus on these sections in blue. Okay,
35:11
Um. So let me read this very long quote: Forgive me. I presented him to the jury as a man born in Lagos, Nigeria, in one thousand nine hundred and thirty. As a member of the Yoruba tribe.
35:20
He was, according to them, possibly a fisherman.
35:22
He had stood away to England in one thousand nine hundred and forty-nine, and arrived as an illegal teenage immigrant in Hull. He was sentenced to twenty eight days in jail for this crime, and he began his sentence at arm in jail on September, one thousand nine hundred and forty nine,
35:35
as far as the defense was concerned. All while I was quote, not quite educationally abnormal and quote, but he was certainly not quote right end quote
35:43
furiously known to the police as Ali Ali Uggy or Lone Ducky. He was a loner with not many friends.
35:50
His mental health problems allegedly began in one thousand nine hundred and fifty, three, and he entered High Roy’s Hospital in Menston, where he was a patient for the next eight years.
35:59
The defense called Dr. Richard Cordy, who was the consulting psychiatrist at hyroids. The doctor stated that at times all the while he was completely withdrawn and inaccessible and on other occasions aggressive, noisy, violent, and disturbed. He was hallucinating. He saw animals, lions with fishes heads, and said these animals were going to kill and eat him.
36:18
He bit, people spat, but his condition gradually improved, so that he was no longer giggling and talking to himself in a confused or childish manner. Originally he would defecate and urinate in the ward.
36:29
He had two jobs, but lost them through fighting and stealing the offense, then called the Staff nurse, Mr. Eric Dent, who described all the wallet as quote, built like a miniature Mr. Universe, and he could take more punishment than Cassie’s clay.
36:42
Mr. Jent went on to assert that Olawali was quote like a savage animal,
36:47
The defense claim that during his twenty years in England all the way had been imprisoned on numerous occasions for assault on police disorderly conduct, and walking abroad. He had often been picked up under section four of the vacancy act one thousand eight hundred and twenty-four, which empowered the police with the rights to stop anyone they suspected of committing an offense.
37:06
According to the police, all the wallet had often been violent to those who had crossed his path, and he habitually used newspapers for sheets and a duffel bag for Apollo. He was no more than a doser who didn’t work, and he was not acceptable as an inmate of a hostile All and Kitchen wanted. It was a clean city, and with this in mind all Wally was a problem.
37:25
The defense argued that this man excuse me, that this was a man who drew social security payments so that he might simply spend them on alcohol.
37:32
According to former Inspector Elliker, quote all of Wally was a small, chunky man, filthy in his personal habits. He was not the sort of man one wanted to grapple with too long or too close. His language was dirty, and he was fluent in the use of four letter words. When Allah, while he became excited he would set up a high pitch screaming noise. Although nothing was happening to him,
37:51
We would scream and shout before being spoken to. Chief Superintendent Lonard Barker appeared for the defense, and reminded the court that Sergeant Kitchen had recently been presented with the Humane Society award for rescuing a man who had fallen into the river air.
38:06
This is quite a picture, right? And this is nothing like the picture that we get in the rest of the chapter from all of the other evidence of David all the way, not to mention the fact that none of this is actually relevant to the fact that he was martyr right? But how do we read this?
38:23
Call him part of the Yuruba tribe, the tribe you’re calling the tribal person You’re saying. He’s not civilized. He showed up as an illegal teenage, immigrant, an illegal immigrant. He was in jail for a crime.
38:35
He was not quite educational, at least abnormal. But he wasn’t smart right. He has All of these names, which turns out, is mostly because they couldn’t pronounce his name. That’s not his fault. He had mental health problems did he
38:50
did he before he went into the hospital.
38:54
It doesn’t seem like it from the rest of the chapter. He was withdrawn in accessible, aggressive, noisy, violent, and disturbed. Well, that’s coming from
39:03
Dr. Richard Cordy, the consulting psychiatrist at this place, where we have a horrible, horrible review. Let’s call it from that other former um asylum patient.
39:15
The other former asylum patient, also talked about the nurses like Mr. Eric den he doesn’t say him by name, but
39:23
we here before this, that
39:26
the nurses are very, very violent, and then we have a nurse saying that alawali was built like a miniature Mr. Universe,
39:34
and that he could take more punishment than he has these clay. How do you know how much punishment he can take?
39:40
And then he calls all the wally the savage animal
39:43
right All of these things he was imprisoned on numerous occasions. Do we believe any of these charges?
39:50
He was violent. That’s not what we get in the rest of the chapter. Was he a doser who didn’t work? Well, he started out working before he was put in hospital.
39:58
Maybe he drew social security payments, but to spend them on alcohol. Does he drink alcohol?
40:04
And then at the end, just cherry on top. Of course, kitchen is said to have been presented with the Humane Society award.
40:12
So I wanna What I want to look at here is the idea of Let me characterize people. How do these lawyers characterize him versus how does the rest of the chapter characterize him?
40:23
Well, let’s look at some examples of how else he is characterized throughout the chapter.
40:28
Here is a first quote from the fourteen year old girl that we meet at the beginning.
40:32
The people on the street were protecting David and objecting to the police while the police were trying to move David on and telling him you shouldn’t be here. The young people gathered all around him. I mean he wasn’t doing anything. He was just standing by the wall like he always did. I thought he was such a humble man. He was polite. I couldn’t see anything that was wrong with him.
40:51
He used to just stand there with his big black overcoat.
40:54
It’s a very different story than someone who is being aggressive towards the police, and using a million four letter words. Right? He’s humble. He’s polite
41:04
all right. Here’s another. Quote
41:06
this uh this one here is from our main narrator and second person.
41:11
If it was not a night when you had to attend college, you might walk up the hill, and then across Woodhouse, more towards Chapel Town, and the pubs that would accept you
41:19
hubs in which you might reasonably expect to find those in whose company you might pass some time, and once they’re in a pub, you would stand with your half of beer because you were not much of a drinker, and listen to the talk and the laughter until the man behind the bar Bring the bell time, ladies and gentlemen, please.
41:35
This doesn’t sound like the same man at all. He was attending college ri
