Malcolm Gladwell, "The Power of Context: Bernie Goetz and the Rise and Fall of New York City Crime" and:

• Stephen Jay Gould, "What Does the Dreaded 'E' Word Mean, Anyway? A Reverie for the Opening of the New Hayden Planetarium"
  
• Mary Kaldor,"Beyond Militarism, Arms Races, and Arms Control"
• Beth Loffreda, Selections from Losing Matt Shepherd: Life and Politics in the Aftermath of Anti-Gay Murder.
  
• Eric Schlosser, "Global Realization"
• Deborah Tannen, "The Roots of Debate in Education and the Hope for Dialogue"
• James Scott, "Behind the Official Story" and Susan Faludi, "The Naked Citadel"
• Steven Johnson, "The Myth of the Ant Queen"
• Mary Kaldor, "Beyond Militarism, Arms Races, and Arms Control" and Azar Nafisi, Selections from Reading Lolita in Tehran

For more assignment ideas involving this essay, please visit the Gladwell link-o-mat.

Gladwell and Kaldor: Context and the War on Terrorism

In your last paper you were asked to consider the possibilities and limits of “rethinking” to alter the world. In his chapter, “The Power of Context (Part One),” Malcolm Gladwell argues for another way to understand and effect change. While Gladwell looks at the epidemic of crime in New York City in the mid 1980s and the dramatic drop in crime rates a decade later and Mary Kaldor points to “new wars” as an epidemic at the beginning of the 21^st century, they both focus on the contagious nature of violence. How does the “Power of Context” help explain why the US is involved in a “war on terrorism” and how does it suggest possible resolutions to this conflict?  Was September 11 a “little thing?” Does Gladwell’s theory have predictive value? That is could it tell us, ahead of time, whether or not the humanitarian approach could “tip” the current epidemic of violence and war to a time of relative peace? What other “signals” or environmental shifts could work to cause this change? Are human’s reactions to violence and war an intrinsic part of how we’re structured or are they subject to small shifts in situation?

Back to top

Gladwell and Loffreda: Applying Social Theory to an Individual Case

For your fourth assignment I would like you to make an argument about the way that Loffreda's account complicates Gladwell's thinking on the subject of social change. In other words, the question assumes that the events surrounding the death of Matt Shepherd can be explained using the terms that Gladwell employs–stickiness, the Law of the Few, the Broken Windows Theory–and so on. But I do not want you simply to use Gladwell's essay as a way of interpreting Loffreda's. I also want you to consider the larger implications. What does Loffreda's essay show that Gladwell has failed to consider or to think through completely? Gladwell could be correct in many respects, but he still may have overlooked certain features of social life. What might Gladwell learn from a reading of Loffreda?

A "C" paper will apply Gladwell's terms to Loffreda's text in a clear, competent, and accurate way. A "B" paper will develop the discussion of "complications" more extensively. An "A" paper will explore original and thought-provoking complications while doing everything that the "C" and "B" papers do as well.

At this point in the semester your paper should include the following:

1. An introductory paragraph that (a) presents the problem, question, or context that your essay responds to; (b) identifies the authors under discussion and their works; (c) gives your readers a statement of the argument you will make or the question you will pose

2. A coherent, well-developed argument that draws on textual evidence to support its claims. Textual evidence should be selected carefully and interpreted in order to guide the reader toward your conclusions.

3. Wherever appropriate, textual evidence that makes connections between the authors

4. Well-organized paragraphs that present a unifying main idea through explanation and illustration. Ideally, the first or second sentence of each paragraph should identify the main idea.

5. Clear, grammatically correct prose.

For the rest of this assignment sequence, see the Universal Human Rights, Globalization, and Social Change sequence.

Back to top

Gladwell and Schlosser: The Context of Globalization

In his essay about crime in New York, Malcolm Gladwell provides a conceptual framework for the study of cultural change, the “power of context.” In your essay, I would like you to consider how Gladwell might use his theory to explain the “global realization” discussed by Schlosser. Use the “power of context” to develop an argument about the cultural changes that have accompanied globalization.

As you construct your argument, consider the following questions:

How do the central issues in Gladwell’s essay – behavioral change and environmental context – contribute to our discussion of globalization? Gladwell writes about local contexts, but how can we imagine thinking about context in connection to Schlosser’s global culture?

It is probably relatively easy to imagine the sudden and ubiquitous nature of McDonald’s being the consequence of a “tipping point,” but think also about Gladwell’s argument that small changes in context can alter human character. What does this suggest to you about how we should understand Schlosser’s argument about the cultural effects of globalization?

To see the rest of the assignments in this sequence, please visit our sample sequences page.

Piper Kendrix Williams

Gladwell and Schlosser: Putting the Fries in Context

In the introduction “The Power of Context,” we read of Malcolm Gladwell's interest in “the specific point at which a fad becomes a…frenzy.” The subsequent essay is an attempt “to understand why some ideas catch on and spread like wildfire, and others fail to attract widespread attention and wither on the vine.” Gladwell poses a “model for how cultural change occurs, a model that highlights the influential role that context plays in shaping and guiding human acts and intentions” (285).

Is the success of the fast food industry due to the “power of context”? Why or why not? Explain your answer in detail. You will first need to consider how and why some fast food chains have gained such popularity worldwide (and nationwide). You will then need to explain how Gladwell's theory is or isn't connected to this proliferation.

Lara Tupper, Fall 2005

Back to top

How does Malcolm Gladwell's discussion of the dynamics of social change confirm, contradict, or complicate Tannen's argument? Does Gladwell's account suggest that social change is decided by the strongest argument? Does debate even play a significant role? If public debate and rational deliberation have a marginal influence, why does the university place so high a premium on them? Have professors depicted the social world in the ways that are flattering to themselves? In what ways is this depiction both accurate and inaccurate?

Back to top

Gladwell and Willis: The Relationship Between Culture and the Character of the Individual

In your last assignment, I asked you to apply Malcolm Gladwell's idea of "the power of context" to the situation of political representation that Lani Guinier critiques, and to assess the moral implications of the transformations you suggested. While Gladwell suggests that seemingly small factors in our immediate environment can cause large changes in human social behavior, in "Selections from Dreaming Me: An African-American Woman's Spiritual Journey," Jan Willis discusses her experience as an individual as a result of a choice between the conflicting cultures of Tibetan Buddhism and Black Panther politics. For your next paper, I would like you to use Gladwell and Willis' essays to explore how we as humans interact with our surroundings on the level of culture.

What is the relationship between culture and the character of the individual? To what extent do cultural surroundings shape who we are through contextual influence? How do our seemingly primary cultural identities affect how we act as individuals when we enter another culture?

Some questions to consider as you begin thinking about your paper: While both Gladwell and Willis discuss changes within individuals as the result of changes in their environments, they seem to do so on different levels. Are these levels indeed different, and if so, what are the implications of that difference for individual character? Or, if you see them as the same, what does that suggest about the relation between culture and character in the contemporary world? How does each author complicate the relationship between cultural surroundings and character that he or she puts forth, and how might each author's position complicate, confirm, or contradict the other's? What might Gladwell's emphasis on "the little things" and Willis' examination of cultural difference have to say to one another, and what conclusions might you draw from this?

If you feel it would help strengthen or develop your project in this paper, you may make reference to de Waal and/or Guinier, although you are not required to do so.

Paul Benzon, Fall 2002

For the rest of this assignment sequence, see the Contemporary Visions of the Self, Character, & Tradition sequence.

Back to top

Gladwell, Scott & Faludi: Behavioral Determinants

In "The Power of Context," Gladwell suggests that "behavior is a function of social context." He explains crime as a product of environmental factors, especially "little things" like broken windows, graffiti, and trash (294). Unlike psychological models, which insist that fundamental character traits and genetics work together to produce behavior, Gladwell emphasizes the significance of "situation" (296). Scott and Faludi also examine several influences on human behavior. Scott discusses the impact of unequal power relations on the behavior of both dominant and subordinate groups, and Faludi suggests that the hazing practiced by upperclassmen on cadets is a product of the tradition of a fourth-class system.

Do these writers have similar or irreconcilable understandings of human behavior? For this paper, you must use Gladwell, Scott, and Faludi to come to a conclusion about the most significant determinants of behavior. What are the practical implications of your understanding of behavior in terms of crime, violence, war, or any other focus of your choosing?

Carrie Preston, Spring 2003

For the rest of this assignment sequence, see the Re-Vision, Tradition & Public Life sequence

Gladwell & Johnson: The Matter of Complexity

In your first essay you dealt with the issues of context and character, and the notion that small changes and circumstantial events can have enormous impact on human behavior. Moving from Gladwell to Steven Johnson, we encounter another counterintuitive theory: namely, that complex social organizations have, in a sense, minds of their own that don't depend upon the decisions of their individual members, or upon the influence of leaders or the individuals Johnson refers to as “pacemakers” (251). According to Johnson, “larger patterns” of behavior and organization “can emerge out of uncoordinated local actions,” and this phenomenon occurs most strikingly in cities (255). “The city is complex because it overwhelms, yes,” Johnson writes, “but also because it has a coherent personality, a personality that self-organizes out of millions of individual decisions” (255).

Utilizing your understanding of Gladwell's theory of context and its profound effects on behavior, write an essay that addresses the following question: What role might “the smallest details of the immediate environment” (Gladwell 185) play in Johnson's understanding of cities as “self-organizing system[s]” (254) and “pattern-amplifying machine[s]” (255)?

Here are some questions to get you started in your thinking: Do Gladwell and Johnson conceive of “environment” in the same way? How might the distinction Johnson draws between the “two kinds of complexity” involved in thinking about urban life (254-55) help you shift your focus from individual effects to “larger patterns” in formulating your project? To what degree can local environments be seen as versions of the “self-organizing system[s]” Johnson is so interested in? How great a role do you think accidents and chance situations play in originating what will become complex, self-organizing systems?

Richard Squibbs, Fall 2005

Gladwell, Kaldor, Nafisi and "New War"

Mary Kaldor, in “Beyond Militarism, Arms Races and Arms Control” and Malcolm Gladwell, in “The Power of Context: Bernie Goetz and the Rise and Fall of New York City Crime”, are both concerned with varying levels of aggressive, violent, “new war” behaviors. Azar Nafisi's excerpt from Reading Lolita in Tehran, one might argue, points to possible results of this type of behavior, which included “diversions and considerations forced on [Iranian civilians] by the regime” (p. 11). Gladwell looks at New York City crime, mock prisons and Good Samaritan experiments, among other things, to illustrate how incremental environmental changes may result in major behavioral and societal changes. Kaldor's concerns are more global, as she documents the shifts in warfare since the Cold War era. She offers explanations for these, as well as a potential solution to curtail this epidemic of “new war” violence and bloodshed. Both of these texts might be used to make meaning of what happened in Nafisi's Iran , and the effect that it had on the women in Nafisi's reading group.

For this paper, think about what you feel is needed to reverse “new war” aggression and the ideology behind it. What are contemporary “new wars”, according to these texts? Use Kaldor, Gladwell and Nafisi to support your position. Even if you disagree with both or one author, you will still need their ideas to counter yours.

As you prepare to write, think about the following:

• Are human beings predisposed to violence as part of our instinctual nature or can we influence these behaviors by altering small – or large – features in the environment? Does globalization complicate a simple solution or make it easier to implement?
• Can Gladwell's theories be applied to better understanding and – hopefully – limiting global violence and terrorism? Could environmental shifts work to cause a reduction in “new war” violence and mentality? Are other factors at work? Is Kaldor's solution to halt the epidemic of global warfare feasible? Can her solution act as a “tipping point” to a more peaceful world? What effects might Kaldor's solution have for Nafisi and her reading group?
• How might Kaldor and Gladwell view September 11 th ?
• What concepts and examples from Kaldor, Gladwell and Nafisi are useful in arguing your view?

Scott Cagenello, Fall 2005

Back to top