Help: Need articles about suburban culture.

kennedy

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2007
Messages
2,820
Reaction score
7
I'm looking for articles published in some sort of reputable source describing the disillusion of the suburbs. Something focusing on how suburbs, while attempting to give everyone a little bit of nature, actually destroyed it. And even better, would be one focusing on how suburbs have helped destroy family culture and childhood "exploration." Even if you could suggest a few sources I might check, it would be greatly appreciated. I'm working on a paper for school examining the evolution of childhood since the middle of the century, and arguing that one of the major causes was suburban sprawl. I'll make sure to post it when it's complete.

Thanks.
 
how suburbs have helped destroy family culture and childhood "exploration."

Hmm, not sure I agree with this. One of the places I grew up was a suburban area of Akron, Ohio, that happened to be a short walk from Sand Run Metropolitan Park. I'd often wander into there with friends and explore the trail system.
 
If it's not too personal, may I ask how long ago that was? One of the major focuses of my paper is how childhood freedom has been cut as parents become increasingly aware of perceived dangers in their neighborhoods. No longer can they explore their world, because the suburbs have created false, idealistic environments where the neighbors don't actually know each other.

Note: This essay by Michael Chabon is the primary source for my paper, and explains what I'm talking about better than I can. The Wilderness of Childhood

My outline looks something like this:

Cultural Shifts as a result of Suburban Sprawl --> Effect on Parenting and Family Dynamic --> Effect on Childhood, specifically Imagination/Exploration --> How these changes affect childhood development --> Implications for Future Generations
 
I lived in Akron from 1965-68 (3rd through 5th grade). The neighborhood was within the city limits but recognizably suburban in layout (think West Roxbury but hillier). The suburban area and the park haven't changed at all since I lived there.
 
I look forward to reading your paper Kennedy. Have you read Bowling Alone? its all about trends in community which may be useful to your paper. It can be accessed here: http://books.google.com/books?id=rd...resnum=4&ved=0CBoQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=&f=false

and the biographical information should be cited on the first few pages of the work. What's really neat is that using google books you can key word search within the text. If not this book, try looking at others on google books. It is really a useful resource.
 
I love Google Books. I just hope that they actually don't take over the planet with it.
 
And the paper is finished. Take a gander. Van, I cheated and read an analysis of Yates' work, including Revolutionary Road, in the Boston Review. It's a synthesis essay, hence all of the outside sources.

The Great Childhood Heist​

The institution of childhood has never remained static throughout history. Before the Great Depression, it was doubtful that the premise of childhood even existed, except perhaps in only the wealthiest of families. Children were used primarily for labor, until Franklin D. Roosevelt enacted labor laws to ensure that adults were given jobs over youths. Yet, even in the past three-quarters of a century it has changed dramatically, and Michael Chabon captures this evolution in his memoir Manhood for Amateurs. There is a heavy focus on retrospection at his personal journey through life, and he recognizes that fundamental characteristics of his own childhood have disappeared from that of his children?s. Examining contemporary childhood, it has become quite clear that shifts in American culture have had a profound effect on this vital period of development, and concern for the future of the children who have matured in this era is quite valid.

Where there once stood endless nature, and expanse of infinite potential, now stands the sprawl of American excess. The reasons for this sprawl, the vast corruption of our countryside, are widely debated and not entirely clear - could it be the proliferation of the automobile? Or degrading conditions in cities? Or perhaps Mr. Thoreau and the Transcendentalists had a hand in the matter. Either way, middle class has been sold an idealized image of a tranquil existence surrounded by natural beauty, only to realize they?re been sold a lie and the very natural beauty they crave was destroyed by their quest to find it. Increasingly banal communities, calculated environments, and depressingly stagnant daily experiences formulate a certain anonymity to the subdivisions of America - when every house looks the same, it?s impossible to identify the individuals residing within. In Levittown, New Jersey, one of the original planned suburbs, homeowners suffered from a plague of homogeneity as the ?conformity of the houses was broken up only by their exterior colors, the choices of which were limited as well? (Knight). This overbearing level of sameness motivated people to act a certain way, as actors in a play, to fit within the idealized constraints of suburban society, as Frank and April Wheeler in Richard Yates?s Revolutionary Road are ?constantly watching themselves, gauging their lives against ideals from the movies or the newspapers? (O?Nan). With this dominating level of uniformity and paramount motivation to achieve ultimate acceptance, how can a healthy neighborhood form? When Chabon moved to Berkeley, California, to a suburban street kindred to every other planned community throughout America, he found out that ?the family next door included a nine-year-old girl; in the house two doors down the other way, there was a nine-year-old boy, her exact contemporary and, like her, a lifelong resident of the street. They had never met? (Chabon 64). The very aspect that defines a neighborhood - the relationships between neighbors - is destroyed because each fa?ade masks the true nature of the people who maintain it, indistinguishable from the rest of the population, and vacant for the terrors of parental imaginations to inhabit.

The suburbs had another function: to furnish the idea of a safe, wholesome family experience. When everyone owns their little piece of nature, a backyard, perceived dangers of reality are eradicated. Fenced in like chickens in a coop, the little tikes are insulated from the cancers of reality. Now, that instinct to protect children has been perverted to the point where there aren?t any spaces ?where kids can unmediatedly be kids, without the requisite caregiver security details and OSHA-compliant play spaces? (Kamp). Today?s parenting inhibits exploration and imagination, and Chabon complains about the ?increasingly organized, chaperoned nature of childhood in modern, middle-class America? that proliferated as Americans became increasingly aware of the horrors facing children (Kakutani 1). Chabon?s greatest grievance is that modern suburban culture is stifling childhood imagination, one of the facets by which he himself learned about the nature of the world around him. He recalls embarking on adventures through his quaint Maryland neighborhood, something he called the ?Wilderness of Childhood? (Chabon 60). Coming from a time in which his parents gave him an ?incredible degree of freedom?to adventure,? he can?t help but notice the ?very grave, very significant shift in our idea of childhood? that?s happened since (Chabon 63). Instead of encouraging children to set out on adventures in whatever alternate reality they can conjure, parents bring kids to ?Chuck E. Cheese, the Jungle, the Discovery Zone: jolly internment centers mapped and planned by adults with no blank spots aside from doors marked staff only? (Chabon 64). Parents today, afraid of the possible threats to their children?s well-being, would never allow their child out to romp on their own, free to imagine whatever they please - they might bump their knee.

So it is clear that children suffer a deprivation of freedom, yet even if given total reign, they would probably be stymied by the vast possibility that awaited them. This generation of kids is starkly different from those that grew up and ?on summer mornings?disappeared into neighborhoods - kid enchantment, emerging only briefly for lunch before plunging back into (their) conspiracies. (They) had no play dates. It was assumed (they?d) return before dinner - safely? (Berg). Parents have entirely revoked liberty from children, and they ?feel the need to be all over their kids? lives? (Berg). As more kids participate in youth sports league, the more obvious it becomes that these leagues have ?less to do with children?s fun than parents? gratification. Play has become serious business. As childhood disappears, so does a child?s idea of play? (Berg). Chabon echoes this sentiment - it dawns upon him that nearly everything his children play with is developed by adults. His case in point: Legos. When he built with Lego bricks, he followed no directions and kits contained ?squares and rectangles?(in) six colors? (Chabon 51). Now, his kids play with a ?vast bestiary of hybrid pieces? and follow step by step guides to create ?trademarked, conglomerate-owned, pre-imagined environments? (Chabon 51, 54). The fantasies of children, which are inspired by popular culture, have been handicapped by the perpetually released ??family movie? - the latest computer-generated piece of animated crap? (Chabon 75). Where the open-ended and exploratory nature of Star Trek and Planet of the Apes had influenced Chabon as a child, movies are now ?like unctuous butlers of the imagination, ready to serve every need or desire as it arises; they don?t leave anything implied, unstated, incomplete? (Chabon 81). They don?t inspire children to congregate and create their own games based on these suggestive realities; instead, they completely fulfill any curiosity a child might have. With no need to explore, children don?t bother trying to imagine what might happen, and stop asking, ?What if??? Where suburbs try to satisfy every need a man might have, from his own little plot of grass to his own little mortgaged castle, they?re supplemented by a relentless supply of distractions and arbitrary games to put the annoying kid into a CGI-induced stupor.

What is happening to the children? What will happen to them when they grow up? No longer are they wondering and wandering, imagining and crafting the most well-laid plans for their todays, let alone their futures. What kid would want to be an astronaut, when everyone knows that an investment banker will make more money? Hyper-sensitive parents refuse to let children out of their sight, to go and explore the boundaries of their world, due to their fear of pedophiles hidden in those gingerbread homes and perfectly manicured lawns, of crazed hooligans speeding down their perfectly cemented cul-de-sacs. The first generation of children to grow up in this carefully regulated are now teenagers, and somehow, it is no surprise that the underage drinking problem has reached all-time highs. Perhaps they?re subconsciously reacting to the childhood instinct to explore what isn?t allowed, or perhaps the complete obliteration of childhood by their parents makes them think that they ought to be treated as adults. What lessons are children being taught if everything in their environment is manipulated to be safe, predictable, and familiar? Will they lose all motivation to push the envelope of human potential, instead content with the status quo, to remain sedentary at their computer screens? At that rate, they?ll all grow up to be Frank Wheelers, full of first-rate ambition without an accomplishment to their name, "hardly ever entertaining a doubt of (their) own exceptional merit." Instead of focusing on totally irrational fears of exotic diseases and vile human predators, parents ought to be worried about the consequences of substituting Pixar movies for adventure stories and Wii for physical exercise.

Chabon, Michael Manhood for Amateurs

Chabon, Michael Wilderness of Childhood

Kamp, David http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/18/books/review/Kamp-t.html

Kakutani, Michiko http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/19/books/19chabon.html?_r=1&pagewanted=print

O?Nan, Stewart http://bostonreview.net/BR24.5/onan.html

Knight, Greg http://www.patioculture.net/paper.html

Berg, Steve http://www.hbci.com/~wenonah/new/childhod.htm
 
I look forward to reading this this weekend when I have a bit of time. sounds like an interesting topic. Is this for HS or college?
 
Very well done, Kennedy.

(One gripe: Pixar does quality work.)
 
Yeah, Pixar does, but I had to think of an animation studio off the top of my head. And a630, I'm glad, because that is what the teacher is trying to drill into us.

And Patrick, it's AP English Language and Composition, a high school class that allows me to earn college credit. So we're supposed to be on par with college freshman.
 
how suburbs have helped destroy family culture and childhood "exploration."
Sorry I don't have any sources for you Kennedy, but wanted to add my 2 cents and add to Ron's comment above. The relative isolation of the suburbs probably allows kids more freedom in their young years. For example, freedom to explore nearby parks, walk to school, ride your bike throughout the neighborhood etc. Grade school kids in Manhattan or the Back Bay are probably not wandering around their neighborhoods with their pals like suburban kids. However, once kids are high school age most would probably be much more stimulated and find many more opportunities for exploration living in an urban environment.

Suburban development in New England is a bit unique compared to the cookie cutter suburban sprawl of many areas of the country. Although bucolic in appearance some of the low density suburbs of Boston, places like Lincoln or Sherborn, strike me as particularly bad places for child exploration regardless of age. When you live in a McMansion and at the end of your 75 foot driveway there is a high speed narrow two lane winding road with no shoulders and no sidewalks your not going to be letting your kid ride his/her bike to a neighbors house. Further you may be enclosed by woods and can barely even any evidence of other human existance - very isolating for a child IMO.
 
Did you read the paper I posted? I tried to address what Ron and you are talking about, because that's actually very similar to how I grew up. I'm talking about kids who were born, maximum, 10 years ago. The locations are more like the faux-naturalism suburbs of the Midwest and the carbon copy mass produced suburbs in the Sunbelt. Also, remember, the suburbs are just one aspect of the overall cultural shift I was trying to explain.
 
Kennedy,

I went back and read it. Interesting read. I agree that there seems to have been a significant shift in the typical childhood experience as you noted. However, I'm just not convinced that this shift has anything to do with the physical layout or look of suburbia. If social and economic factors are equalized, I would not expect children in urban areas to have more unstructured time for exploration compared to suburban children. Children growing up in rural areas may fare better. If anything maybe the experience of children today is more like what is was like to grow up a child in the upper east side of Manhattan in the 50's, 60's and 70's. More arranged playdates, trips to the park with your parent, more field trips with parents to child centered destinations, etc.

From a child's point of view, I don't think it matters if you grow up in cookie cutter Levittown or a town with rich architectural diversity in its residential stock. Think of children who spent their childhoods among the vast urban monotony of neighborhoods in Queens, Brooklyn or the 3 deckers of Dorchester. I'm sure many had wonderful childhoods full of many hours of play without adult interference or direction. In regard to unstructured time to play and explore, the childhood experience has probably changed for the worse in those urban neighborhoods just as it has in the suburbs over the last few decades.
 
Speaking of kids as products of their physical environments (and whatever else) - today I witnessed a massive group of LAUSD kids, probably 8-10, running around (or trying to) in a park on some sort of field trip. Didn't think much of it ... but then noticed how FAT half of them were. Do schools have recess anymore? Do these kids move? I guess keeping your kid inside on the couch beats having them run around with MS13 and whatever else. Not to mention that cheap food is bad food in the USA. Try to find a good grocery store in south central. Once again the poor are punished. Very sad.
 
I'm amazed people aren't fatter. From an evolutionary perspective, our taste buds have evolved to issue highly favorable responses to foods that were nutrient rich, had high levels of caloric intake, or were otherwise essential in some respect but also very RARE (meat, sugars, fats, salt). Today, genetic evolution has been outpaced by scientific evolution, and now all of the foods for which it was NECESSARY to have positive-feedback taste buds (lest we treat them like any other easily obtainable grain and not eat enough) are now ABUNDANT (arguably over abundant, actually). Moreover, the very things we needed these foods for (energy to walk long distances, stay warn in cold climates, expend energy to build shelter and hunt, are now no longer a part of our routine (we drive cars and buses or even bikes to offices where we sit down and live in shelters that are temperature regulated). So, in sum, even though nothing I have said is revolutionary or profound, here is the basic point - we evolved from a state of scarce food and shelter, with our taste buds and neurons developing accordingly, and now due to our brilliant inventions we have succeeded...at what? creating an environment for which we were not meant. Even our pets are fat.
 
Recess has been cut practically everywhere. It was cut way back when I was in 3rd grade. Gym classes are also cut. Budgets suck, huh?
 
I say, lets build suburbs far away from school so kids can't walk to their classes. bus 'em all to and fro, get rid of recess, get rid of gym and have desks be fitted with reclining chairs. The wave of the future is telecommuting. kids will just tune in from bed in their jammies. but until then, we can accommodate lack of interest in energy expenditures by mandating taxes pay for segways to travel the halls. I also propose a second lunch time for those extra hungry biggies.

All kidding aside, something is not right. I think it stems from a problem of collective action. The things that are most rational on a small scale are completely counterproductive on a larger collective scale. The same thing explains sprawl. climate issues. etc.
 
Recess has been cut practically everywhere. It was cut way back when I was in 3rd grade. Gym classes are also cut. Budgets suck, huh?

How much does recess cost? Is it because the teachers have to stay an hour longer if there's a midday break?

Recess is kind of pointless anyway. It's not like kids are compelled to run around and get exercise; a lot of them sit and play cards or whatever. Gym is a much better use of money and time.
 
All kidding aside, something is not right. I think it stems from a problem of collective action. The things that are most rational on a small scale are completely counterproductive on a larger collective scale. The same thing explains sprawl. climate issues. etc.

Not sure exactly what you mean here. There doesn't seem to be a goal we are collectively pursuing in regard to the obesity issue (unlike in the climate case). Clearly those with the individual means are able to buy healthy food, exercise at fancy gyms, and go green. And the poor obviously don't have a choice to shop at Whole Foods, so it is individually rational for them to eat at McDonalds. Similarly, there was a really depressing article I read a few weeks ago, about how young black and hispanic kids spend significantly more time on the internet/smart phones than whites (consistent with a630's observation). It's not just recess - what are they doing after school when their wealthy suburban peers are off at club soccer practice? But these are facts that have to do with simple economic inequity. Clearly there are ways to improve this situation but....

Could you be referring to small group, lobbyist interests (say, for corn subsidies => cheap, ubiquitous high fructose corn syrup, etc) obstructing the public interest? There's a depressing example of collective action at its "best".
 

Back
Top