Louis Wirth's definition of a city is that it is dense, it is a permanent settlement with a high population, and that it has heterogeneity of people. His definition seems to hold true today but it is a little off when you look at it. The city is a permanent settlement but most of the people that are there seem as if they commute there rather than live there, so it’s a settlement for some but more of a place of work or entertainment for others. As for heterogeneity it is almost wrong. If you look at it as the types of people that are around you everyone is different in various ways. But if you were to look at them as a whole you would notice that they are all the same. They are all rushing from point A to point B, dodging vehicles and running lights to get there as fast as possible. They all seem to move as one huge amorphous blob.
He fails to mention the fact that the city can change drastically. When you walk around the city the environment and people change with the neighborhood. While at the Harold Washington library the population was diverse and relaxed. But while on Adams street it was the bustle of city life that all the Hollywood movies show.
I strongly agree with Wirth when he mentions that people in the city are more secondary contacts rather than primary. I know that in Naperville you have more friends rather than acquaintances but in the city you are more likely to have acquaintances over friends. This is due to the fact that the environment is vastly different. As you spend more and more time in the city you get the feeling as if you must hurry to get where you are going. As this feeling takes over you do not really stop and get to know those around you. Working in the city you would do what you need to do to finish the day, while in the suburbs the pace is a bit more laid back. Although you stay busy you get the chance to get to know the people around you.
This reading was informative; it made me think a bit differently about Chicago and about Las Vegas, realizing that although I lived in the suburbs in Las Vegas it was more closely related to a city.
Interesting post John. I like your point about how the city -- despite its surface heterogeneity--imposes a certain uniformity on its inhabitants. The most obvious example of this -- and something pointed about by German sociologist Georg Simmel a long time ago-- is that city dwelling requires slavish regulation of one's life by clock time, timetables and schedules. This is why in the city everyone who is not extremely rich or a homeless bum is constantly hurraying everywhere.
ReplyDelete