Sonja got us off to a rousing start this week, sharing some examples of the local rules and regulations sometimes passed in the name of community, such as codes on building appearances and the sale of alcohol. From there, we moved back to address some of the fundamentals in talking about community...
...such as clarifying from the beginning that shared geography does not make, or at least does not imply community. We discussed the Sumner-Glenwood development that we saw earlier and the apparent lack of spaces for community to develop. Despite what Paul said about the supposed role that porches would play in fostering communication, there was a clear consensus among us that the area lacked the physical structures necessary for community activities.
Having clarified what wasn't working for this community, we started to talk about what would help an area become a community. Examples included the lack of physical divisions, the role that children can play in bringing parents and families together, and general fun events, from book clubs to barbecues. We noted that the key ingredient seemed to be an individual's time and energy invested in interpersonal connections, i.e. social capital.
I took a brief reprieve from my diligent note taking to deliver a flagrant oversimplification of Jane Jacobs' The Death and Life of Great American Cities. I stressed the importance of spontaneous interactions between strangers to building social capital and how the physical structure and zoning rules of a neighborhood can encourage or discourage these interactions. However, I also wanted to stress that Jacobs was specifically targeting urban communities.
Following my qualification, two questions were raised. Sonja shared with us her own experience growing up in a small town on the shores of Lake Superior, a far cry from the cities that I had been describing. She suggested that in these situations a person develops a connection to the land rather than to a community. The next question raised was about whether more spontaneous interactions could also spur racial animosity, such as the Faribault woman who complained about Somalis socializing outside of a restaurant there. This example and the two separate communities involved led us to consider how community distinguishes itself.
So naturally we started to talk about Olaf and the complexities of community there. Specifically, we talked about how easy it was to develop norms and a language around Olaf. However, we moved from there to talking about all the sub-communities at Olaf when Steph mentioned how disorienting it was to return to Olaf after spending time with just the ultimate Frisbee team. That led us to think about how these groups affect the broader community. We noted that the people who generally feel the most isolated from Olaf tend to lack these smaller, tighter groups, but can they also hinder people from interacting with people that they don't have much in common with? Applying this framework more generally, we could ask when does a voluntary association become a special interest group?
Following this we watched a cute commercial with dads and babies that left precisely 5 out of our 7 with watery eyes.
No comments:
Post a Comment