And in that moment, I swear we were infinite.
-Stephen Chbosky Perks of Being a Wallflower
“We were”: Root sentence
“And in that moment”: Intro element
In this sentence there are many components. The dependent clause is the introduction element; it is explaining when the idea took place. It is then followed by a sense of affirmation. The “I swear” gives insight into the author’s next claim. “We were” is the very basis of the sentence and is what the rest of the words are focused around. Finally, “infinite” is describing what everything else was leading up to. It is the exact feeling the writer had in the moment he was so certain of.
And when the sun rose, I remember it was on fire.
“Architectural Exclusion: Discrimination and Segregation Through Physical Design of the Built Environment”
The built environment is characterized by man made physical features that make it difficult for certain individuals, often poor people and people, of color, to access certain places. Bridges were designed to be so low that buses could not pass under them in order to prevent people of color from accessing a public beach. Walls, fences, and highways separate historically white neighborhoods from historically black ones. Wealthy communities have declined to be served by public transit so as to make it difficult for individuals from poorer areas to access their neighborhoods. Although the law has addressed the exclusionary impacts of racially restrictive covenants and zoning ordinances, most legal scholars, courts, and legislatures have given little attention to the use of these less obvious exclusionary urban design tactics. Street grid layouts, one way
streets, the absence of sidewalks and crosswalks, and other design elements can shape the demographics of a city and isolate a neighborhood from those surrounding it. In this way, the exclusionary built environment the architecture of a place functions as a form of regulation; it constrains the behavior of those who interact with it, often without their even realizing it. This Article suggests that there are two primary reasons that we fail to consider discriminatory exclusion through architecture in the same way that we consider functionally similar exclusion through law. First, potential challengers, courts, and lawmakers often fail to recognize architecture as a form of regulation at all, viewing it instead as functional, innocuous, and pre political. Second, even if decision makers and those who are excluded recognize architecture’s regulatory power, existing jurisprudence is insufficient to address its harms.
Schindler uses the “They say, I say” form a little less explicitly than explained in the text. She talks about the building of architecture as the “they”; It is the actions of others that she is reflecting on. Schindler doesn’t take any specific text rather she develops her own. Her work talks about the discrimination through the building of certain structures within a society such as a bridge. She mentions people in power, like judges, but just acknowledges their role in the discrimination. Schindler doesn’t exactly contribute the “I say” component following.
The girls layed out by the pool; they wore the new swim suits they bought earlier that day.
My mom made coffee before starting her day; she knew it was going to be a long one.
I lost my phone before I left for class. It was incredibly frustrating because I needed it that day.
My roommate fell asleep before me last night. It was the first time in weeks I had some time to myself.