"They don't understand that what Americans need is more nonrational, nonpurposeful interaction with people with whom they have no natural common cause. "

 

Image from CoolTown Studios

Long-lamented in this blog is the lack of appreciable public space in Franklin and modern suburbs in general. It's my contention that a great deal of the boorish behavior you see between and among certain online and talk radio denizens (I won't include any ironic links here) is fueled by the fact that, well, people don't mix anymore. There is little, if any, opportunity for routine social interaction with people outside of our ideological comfort zone; the echo chamber some people maintain feeds an almost pathological sense of "us vs. them" at the expense of any vestige of real engagement. Ideology becomes dogma, and dogma is immovable.

I've been fortunate enough to eventually meet in person most of Franklin's local bloggers and city politicians - - some of whom I disagree with on a great many issues - - in completely contrived (but otherwise pleasant) situations. These big and small gatherings have been instructive and enormously gratifying to everyone involved - - a concrete manifestation of the "New Day" for local government many anticipated when two sitting "old guard" aldermen were defeated in the most recent election.

People still disagree, but actual ideas are exchanged. Arguments rise and fall without resorting to personal attacks. Persons with different world-views find common ground.

Things are different than they were as recently as a year ago. I'll attend an Economic Development Commission meeting next week as a member, and everyone there might disagree with every word out of my mouth, but the ideological complexion of that commission is now different than it was before I got there. I'll push for incentives to help smaller, locally-owned cafes, restaurants and coffee shops develop, grow and survive (and ask why huge, self-sufficient chains like Staybridge get incentive funds after they've already committed to Franklin). They can all roll their eyes at me, but at the very least we will put that now-mysterious process under a microscope and the idea that small businesses have community economic value will be out in the open.

An interesting intersection with Day One of the Obama presidency.

One local blogger who is particularly fond of simply ridiculing or lobbing names at those who don't agree with him (he defames groups and individuals with equal glee) likes to mock the idea that things have indeed fundamentally changed, locally or nationally; he clings to a fading "old boy" paradigm, though the coattails available to him are getting scarce. Perhaps it's no coincidence that I have yet to meet this particular person in the flesh or indeed even sight him at a single local meeting, event, gathering or place of business. He seems to limit himself to VIP (i.e. coattail) events.

Granted, the odds of incidental contact are low in suburban enclaves like Franklin (where we go from garage to parking ramp and back again) but I think this person could benefit from a few sessions "out among the public," as he once put it, in unstructured, non-VIP circumstances.

But it's more likely that he wants to remain entrenched; "nuance" is not marketable. World Wrestling Foundation-level rhetoric evidently pays the bills, and Us vs. Them is much, much easier to maintain when you don't have to look Them in the eye and get to know Them as actual human beings.

With that in mind, here's yet another column praising the almost-forgotten concept of The Third Place and its value to us as human beings capable of empathy and tolerance for people who are not exactly like us.

From the Dallas Morning News:

Gregory Rodriguez: Long live the corner cafe

Friday, December 5, 2008

The economic sky might be falling, but here I am at Starbucks in Los Angeles' Koreatown fretting over the death of the cafe. Really.

The New York Times recently had a story about the decline of traditional cafes and bars in France – there were 200,000 in 1960, and today there are only 41,500. It made my heart sink. I mean, if the French are losing the art of sitting around in public doing nothing together, what hope do we Calvinistic Americans have?

You think I'm kidding. But if the economy does tank totally, all we've really got is one another.

Here in the U.S., we fetishize family to the detriment of our collective civic life. Our academics mourn the loss of "social capital." They're upset that we're "bowling alone." Fancy foundations give money to bolster "civic engagement." Come on, Americans, they tell us, start interacting with each other again.

The academics and the foundations are on the right track, but there is a problem with their approach to improving civic life. They tend to want people to come together with some sort of common purpose or agenda. They are so mired in the realm of policy and politics, they don't understand that what Americans need is more nonrational, nonpurposeful interaction with people with whom they have no natural common cause.

Not that there's anything wrong with common cause. The campaign was a bright spot in social engagement, on both sides, but especially for the blues: huge rallies, armies of volunteers and high voter turnout.

But one grass-roots campaign isn't enough to turn around the fact that public life is still in steep decline in the U.S., or that we're becoming increasingly less likely to talk to – let alone pal around with – people who don't share our worldview or party affiliation. That's where cafes and bars and diners come in.

It's been two decades since sociologist Ray Oldenburg wrote The Great Good Place, his homage to "third places" – neither work nor home – that help us get through life. "The structure of the urban, industrialized society is not conducive to good human relations," he wrote. "Its high degree of specialization brutalizes many of the relationships people have with one another. The resulting compartmentalization ... leaves individuals ignorant of the 'interests, ideas, habits, problems, likes and dislikes' of those not in their own group."

Coffeehouses, corner bars and restaurants free people from "the obligations of social roles and the styles and demeanor with which those roles must be played. Here, individuals may uncork that which other situations require them to bottle up."

In addition to Starbucks, one of the few true pan-ethnic gathering places in my neighborhood, I frequent the HMS Bounty, an old-fashioned watering hole on Wilshire Boulevard across from where the Ambassador Hotel once stood. On any given night, a motley assortment of characters gathers there to drink and talk, talk and drink. And believe me, we don't always get along.

Some of the strangers there have become acquaintances, and some acquaintances have become friends. What they confirm for me is that civic life isn't about structure; we don't have to play softball or volunteer for a cause to better engage with our world.

It's too bad the French are losing one of their greatest cultural strengths. Their tradition of the public living room set an example for the world. When times get tough, at least we can go for coffee or a glass of wine and learn how everyone else is holding up, or just leave it all behind.

Gregory Rodriguez is a columnist for the Los Angeles Times. His e-mail address is grodriguez@latimescolumnists.com.

Comments

[Cindy]

I know we've recently disagreed, and I don't mean to be a brat, but this post reminds me of a question I've been meaning to ask you: Why do you live in a suburb? It seems like you really hate it. Is the goal to change the suburb to someplace you want to live, or to make sure everyone is as miserable as you seem to be?

I've always really liked living in the suburbs. I see plenty of people, I even interact with (gasp!) those that might have a different world view. But I also get great schools for my children and little crime at my doorstep.

I guess I don't understand why it's so bad, and if it's so bad, why you stay.

[John Michlig]

I consider that a very good question, and one that gets to the root of why this subject is so fascinating to me.

And I'll set myself to answering it in some detail after I return from picking up my daughter from her school, which is less than a mile away yet UNREACHABLE by foot or bike. :)

[Cindy]

(Imagine the Jeopardy song playing in background while waiting.)

[Rob]

Thanks for bringing this article to my attention, John.

Cindy, I can't speak for your situation, or Franklin in particular, but there's nothing wrong with wanting to create a better place for the community someone lives in. It's really good that you like where you live, but aren't there any changes you'd like to make to it?

[Greg Kowalski]

Exactly, Rob!

I mean c'mon Cindy, why do you have a blog if it's not to keep people informed and to put up your thoughts and opinions on issues?

That's why I blog!

[Cindy]

I'm simply asking a question. I've been promised an answer. I can be patient.

[John Michlig]

Cindy, I started writing a long-winded answer, racing to get done before an looming series of meetings, but then was struck by the notion that you are plainly addressing (and mischaracterizing) my attitude without having read much of what is here - or indeed, the specific blog entry above.

I would consider it a great favor if you would take time to read some of the material along the right side of this page under the "Special Topics" heading. (Here is another specific entry also related to the "Third Place" concept:
http://fullyarticulated.typepad.com/sprawledout/the-paradox-of-sociabilit.html)

Now:

Agree with the points made? Disagree? Something unclear? Did you discover something you hadn't thought about before? Need expansion on a certain topic or issue? Note any red herrings or logic breakdowns? Any common ground to expand upon?

Another alternative: A "contrived meeting" over coffee, where we can REALLY work over the myriad issues related to how our built environment has been mishandled, what that means to various aspects of our lives and economy, how things can be improved, why a great many of these issues are indeed conservative issues, etc. If you disagree with any or all of my positions on development, I would be FASCINATED to know why and gratified by the opportunity to expand upon these issues in person.

Because, Cindy, you and I simply do not ENGAGE in this dysfunctional format (see blog entry above). But I know we will in "real life," for better or worse. :)

What say ye?

[Cindy]

I'd be glad to get to know you better. I'm a little concerned about one thing you e-mailed, but I'll e-mail a reply.

Still, I ask, why do you live in a suburb when you seem to be so unhappy with the concept of a suburb?