Cities 07

“A city is a large community where people are lonesome together.” - Herbert V. Prochnow.
Communities are formed when conditions are right- shared interests, beliefs, and a connection to the geographical area. Communities must have a center point, a common meeting ground. Does Mr. Prochnow have a point in saying the city is a lonely place? In this paper I will be examining 3 different ‘communities: University Commons Apartment complex, rural Scandia, MN, and Dinkytown. Through personal interviews, research, and non-participant observation I will seek to explain that the essence of ‘community’ can develop anywhere where there are people willing to foster it regardless of it being a rural or urban area.
At a first glance, urban, suburban, and rural communities are, particularly by stereotype, appear to be very different ways of living. Urban gives you the hustle and bustle of commerce Monday through Friday, mothers walk to the park with their children in the suburbs, and tractors slow traffic on the highways of the rural towns. There are even many theorists who claim to give evidence of these differences and do so adamantly. Wirth declares that in urban life, people substitute primary relationships for secondary ones, in turn weakening our traditional human ties, something also known as “urban personality”. Webber supports his own claim by saying that “Urbanites no longer reside exclusively in metropolitan settlements, nor do ruralites live exclusively in the hitherlands,” (472). Urban and rural areas are becoming more and more integrated and the interaction between the two is growing less expensive. It is for this reason that ‘community’ is not only found in rural areas, but wherever people want it to foster.
Conventionally, when we hear the word ‘community’ it reminds us of the suburbs, community centers, PTA meetings, et cetera, but what is the true meaning of community? Dictionary.com gives definitions ranging from “an assemblage of interacting populations occupying a given area.” To “a social, religious, occupational, or other group sharing common characteristics or interests and perceived or perceiving itself as distinct in some respect from the larger society within which it exists”. With such variations it is difficult to find a happy medium that covers all of the characterstics that a community does.
Things such as density, heterogeneity, and homogeneity all come into play in the construction of a community. Urban communities may tend to be more apt to be formed with less emphasis on physical location and more focused certain groups of people who share a common interest or belief which brings them together. This however, does not hold as true for the people of rural areas where there is far less density, and people are brought together more through common geography than shared interests. Though bringing this to another level, it may be the common interest of privacy or space that brings the people to a rural area, in turn being the same attraction that draws communities of urbanites together. According to Wirth, this may very well be the case. Urban dwellers are inclined to be dependent on more people for their needs and contentment; therefore they associated themselves with far more groups and organizations than do the people of rural areas. This is what Wirth is referring to when he claims that people of urban areas substitute primary relationships for more secondary ones. There is lots of recognition between people in close quarters, yet most of this communication takes place at an elementary level, particularly if they are not in a place for similar interests.
Such secondary relationships, associations almost being the better word, are often found in large apartment complexes in urban areas. For example, take University Commons, a large apartment complex near Dinkytown. This high density complex includes 4 buildings with approximately ## units per building, housing anywhere from 1 to 4 people per unit. This particular apartment would even do the work to find roommates for you. In a personal interview with a University Student and University Commons, Jessica, we discussed the situation. The roommate selection process happened in Jessica’s case. She lived in a 2 bedroom apartment, sharing one bedroom with a close friend, while the other bedroom was occupied by two people she had not had previous contact with. It is interesting to note that though these four girls shared a common area of laundry, kitchen, and living room, no more than secondary relationships were formed over the course of one year. This is an easy example of an urban personality setting. Though most of the people who live in University Commons most likely do have the common interest of attending school at the University of Minnesota, being that it is such a large school with many, many different interests most of which attract an extremely diverse association of people. This setting does not create a ‘community’ of people. Wirth states that the higher number of people within contact of each other, there develops an affinity for elementary level communication. This elementary level of communication includes general topics which could be believed to be of interest to the general population. The girls that Jessica lived with (excluding her roommate) had almost nothing in common with her besides their mutual attendance at the University. To overcome this lack of community through geography, people in urban areas seek other ways to satisfy their need for a community through organized groups of people with similar interests to themselves.
On the University Commons website it claims that this is a ‘student oriented community’- hence the word ‘community’. However, if one clicks on the ‘community’ tab, you are brought to a page of floor plans, amenities, and a topic called lifestyle which basically speaks of the attractions of the city of Minneapolis, not its personal features. Given its location and overall setup [drawing], Jacobs would love to tear this ‘community’ apart. While containing sidewalks (that go nowhere except around the buildings) that the people who live there use to some extent there is almost no surveillance whatsoever. There are no businesses within a half of a mile from the complex and the few windows that are at ground level typically shut out the sidewalk with closed curtains. There are also no attractions for people from outside the ‘community’ to go to. It is almost in a sense a gated community, minus the gate and the shared want of safety and privacy that a gate would offer.
One rationale in explaining this lack of community at University Commons, as well as for many other areas of the city, is that the people who reside there do not own their place of residence. They bear no connection to the land around them, many having come from smaller towns farther away. There is so much to take in when living in an urban area that one must pick and choose which is the most important to him, and that more often than not, does not include wherever they happen to be living that year. What use is it to get to know your neighbor when you will both be in different places within the next year? This is the problem of heterogeneity often found in the city. Wirth states, “Wherever large numbers of differently constituted individuals congregate, the process of depersonalization also enters.”(p101). The people living here tended to assume a temporary status thus feel little desire to foster a real community.
Instead of fostering close relationships as the dorms often do, the denseness of the people there creates separated by walls does not lead typically to primary relations with ones neighbors, as Jessica previously described to me. When asked if she knew or had met any of her apartment neighbors, I was surprised to find that for the most part, she did not know any of them, in fact, she rarely saw anyone in the hallway or outside of the complex. This could be said to result in an alienation of people. But is it the density and heterogeneity of the city that leads to alienation and a lack of community?
The second community I observed was Scandia, Minnesota. Scandia is a small town of about 2,700 people located along the Wisconsin border, northeast of the Twin cities. This situation presents quite a different view from the University Commons ‘community’ setting. Here, many of the houses are not situated near one another and approximately 94% of the people own their homes (Census, 2000), quite the opposite of UC. There are, however, quite a few similarities between the two. There is also a substitution of primary relationships for secondary ones. For instance there is one main ‘ma and pa’ goods store in the ‘downtown’ area of Scandia. After sitting in my car and observing for about 15 to 20 minutes one Saturday afternoon, I saw many people I recognized, mostly parents of past friends or friends of my parents. There were also several that I was not familiar with, though they seemed comfortable with the area and had most likely lived there for a long time as well.
The amenities in Scandia include things such as an elementary school, one Lutheran church, two restaurant/bars, a small goods store, gas station, pet food store, and of course, a liquor store. The nearest commercial area outside of Scandia is over ten miles away. This being true, it limits the options of the local people to the same small businesses which increases contact among the general population. The community center is the meeting place of several local clubs and also the home of Scandia’s annual celebration called “Taco Daze,” where tacos are served and a mini (and I mean MINI) carnival is hosted after the parade which takes place the first weekend in September, and has been for over the past 30 years.
Webber states that cities only exist because having such a high density of people in one area allows for reduced costs of living. Everything begins to increase in expense the more distance you add to it. It could be for this reason that there are simply more families than single people in rural areas. In Scandia, around 70% of the people are or have been married, and there is also a surprisingly low divorce rate (Census-zip code 55073, 2000). Interestingly enough, in an urban area, about 70% of people had never been married (census-zip code 55414, 2000 ). Being that the cost of living tends to run higher in rural areas, it helps to have the support of a possible two incomes which a family lifestyle can offer.
There are no fast food or chain stores in this rural setting either. This aspect alone gives each person a general connection to their physical community in that there is a local economy which depends on the people of the area associating and doing their business at these local enterprises. This local economy that has a long history, unites the people of the area, creating a sense of community between them. The local community also caters to their local population of families, from the elementary school to businesses closing early, recognizing that there is little demand for nightlife activities.
Upon visiting one of the local bar/restaurants two Friday nights in a row, I observed mostly families or couples of elderly people frequent the restaurant until early evening. As the night approached, I saw many of the same faces the second Friday that I observed the first Friday night. Wirth includes in his argument of Urbanism being a poorer form of social control that within a rural society there is a sense of predictability about it. It is feasible to predict who will socialize with whom and their relationships with each other. He claims that there is a lack of this predictability in the city. General patterns of people could possibly be forecast, yet with the high heterogeneity of an urban area there is an increased sense of complexity and disorder associated with group formation.
Interestingly, throughout this rural community, the ‘Urban Personality” can still be found. Whether they be people who simply refuse to be a part of the social community or are people have moved from the city, many people have been attracted here for the increase of space and privacy that the area offers. The rural area and its low density does offer people a lot of physical privacy, as well as activities not always available in an urban area.
Thus far we have discussed two types of ‘communities’. The Urban giant apartment complex and a small Minnesotan town. The first bearing a geographical sense of community, but lacking common interests between people, and the second also having a geographical sense of community but also sharing common interests and beliefs. The third type of community that I would like to discuss is one that has less of an influence through geographical area and more of the people are drawn to their ‘community’ through common a attraction and benefits from being members in such a community.
Dinkytown, though urban in location, bears a relatively strong resemblance to a rural town. Most of the restaurants and bars are non-chain and cater specifically to the majority of people in the area. The population in and surrounding Dinkytown is compromised mostly of young adults attending the University of Minnesota. The businesses in there understand the wants and needs of this population and therefore most food businesses cater to the night life often associated with young people. Here there is also a small goods store, restaurants, bars, churches, and a few others. As stated before, most of these are locally owned and have a long history with the area. This long history and personal ownership gives the people of the area a sense of belonging. Wirth also makes the point that as more and more youth join the national and international cultures through a college education the focus and attatchment to physical locations is declining. So while most of the student population will not reside in the area but a few years, having these businesses that have been there many years before and will be there many years after gives them a way to connect to the area.
While walking around Dinkytown it is a commonplace to see many familiar faces, just as you would in a small town. In going out to restaurants and bars one can almost expect to be surrounded by recognizable faces be it someone from a class, a neighbor, or friend. This familiarity is at the heart of the spirit of community. It gives one a connection to the area, which is something very unique, particularly in an urban setting. Community can be more complicated in the city, for everyone is drawn to urban areas for different reasons and finding a common interest that is strong enough to persist through all the dissimilarities is very unique. Perhaps the community in a city is not established through residency as found in a rural area, but a combination of geography and mutual wants and needs. Particularly in this Dinkytown example of an urban setting, this is many people’s first home outside that of their parents. So many firsts happen to a person as they begin their life here that it can be overwhelming. Fortunately this uncertainty is also felt by many in the area, bringing them together through their shared experiences.
I would hold both Dinkytown and Scandia to be comparatively strong communities, though they are extremely different. These examples show that the urban personality can exist in any setting, it follows the person, the area does not always bring it upon the person. ‘Communities’ such as University Commons do not foster a social community, but this is not always an issue for an urban dweller. Webber states that physical location is of decreasing importance because of today’s opportunities to be a part of so many other communities not based on physical locality. “..lives in a life-space hat is not defined by territory and deals with problems that are not local in nature,”(p474). This is quite a contrary view from most of history. For many, urban space merely offers a well-situated position for access to all of the other communities that are of more importance to them than a spatial one.
Overall, while it can be said that Wirth makes some very good points, as does Webber, their theories are incomplete (though this may be due partly to the era in which they were written). The word ‘community’ encompasses such a broad and complex amount of areas it is hard to exactly pinpoint where it can or cannot be found. Today with the blending of rural and urban peoples, one can no longer state that ‘community’ only exists in small towns or specific organized groups. There will always be people who value a sense of community and those who don’t. Those who do find value in it will either physically place themselves with others who feel this way also- be it in the middle of the city or the middle of nowhere or they will find connections through groups be them organized or not. True ‘community’ cannot always be found in highly capitalized situations or through those claiming to have community- it is all through the social effort of the people involved. It cannot be created commercially or merely by association but embracing the bonds of genuine common interests, goals, and beliefs of the people.