Death Of Kitty Genovese Analysis

I think that Georg Simmel and his sociological ideas greatly coincide with the outrage over the death of Kitty Genovese. Although Simmel studied these concepts in a different time to when the tragedy took place, the basic societal groups of understanding remain the same. His personal observations and explorations of social geometry and how groups function conform with the actions and behaviours of the witnesses who refrained from helping in that situation. The uncertainty of acting independently turned these bystanders against the idea of helping in preventing this crime.

George Simmel sought to understand and convey something about how city life is experienced by people. He studied how people in a metropolitan society were bombarded with

As the New York Times reported - ''For more than half an hour 38 respectable, law-abiding citizens in Queens watched a killer stalk and stab a woman in three separate attacks in Kew Gardens.” (Nytimes.com, 2014). Although it was primarily reported that thirty-eight people witnessed these violent attacks, this figure was later lessened to a dozen. These people had only witnessed parts of the attack and were unaware of what was truly happening. Two people, Joseph Fink and Karl Ross, independently watched this crime happen and did nothing. Fink saw the first stabbing from across the street, understood what was taking place yet stayed in the building’s lobby unresponsive. Ross opened his door as Moseley returned to Genovese’s building for the second attack. He witnessed this second stabbing and yet didn’t take any action until he was instructed to call the police by Genovese’s friend who came to her aid, unfortunately too late. (New York Post,

(Giddens and Sutton, n.d.). Simmel’s idea of social geometry revolves around dyadic and triadic relationships. Each partner in the dyad is directly responsible for any collective action. In a triad, an individual participant is confronted with the possibility of being overpowered by a majority. There is a component of domination within the triad as the majority will hold power over an individual. The triad offers new possibilities of social action while restricting other opportunities. It does not hold the same opportunities of individual expression as the dyad. (Socio.ch, 2016). Without limiting the group to just a triad, the differences between a small number of people and a larger group are clearly obvious. The larger group holds much more of an influence on the members, which can sway people to make them agree with the majority and lessen people’s opinions of their own