About //nedward.org
Nedward.org is the personal weblog of John Niedermeyer, an Editorial Designer at NYTimes.com, living in Brooklyn.
nedward.org is the personal weblog of John Niedermeyer, an Editorial Designer at NYTimes.com, living in Brooklyn.
nedward.org is the personal weblog of John Niedermeyer, an Editorial Designer at NYTimes.com, living in Brooklyn.
Nedward.org is the personal weblog of John Niedermeyer, an Editorial Designer at NYTimes.com, living in Brooklyn.
Wow, what a tirad. Pretty cool little editoral. You know, you almost have an e-zine going with all these opinion pieces you put out. However, I do take exception to a paragraph in your article. You state that not living in a “mixed use neighborhood” creates an “unhealthy dependence” on Ma and Pop, and/or resulting in those younger “vehicularly-challenged” people seeking out older, “automobile-endowed” individuals, coupled with some sort of sense of “entitilement.” Those statements are baseless and comepletely untrue. You have effectively alienated every non-suburbanite kid in America. Unfortunately for me, I was dependant on my parents until I turned 16, because if I wanted to bike to the nearest K-mart it would have taken me literally a day (one way). The closest pizza shop? 1 hour both ways which, to my great joy, was situated on the opposite side of a valley from me. The closest kid my age was greater than a mile away (and he was a weirdo. Plus he smelled). I understand that you are pulling on your own experiences in your article, but before you make such wide generalizations, please think of the implications of what you suggest and the fact that not everyone grew up as you did. Rural America isn’t unhealthy because they have to get a ride from mom and dad, or feel that they are “entilted” to anything, just like suburban America hasn’t lost all sense of values and morality in their empty, pre-fab lifestyles.
Hey ben, thanks for your comment. However, I was talking about the harm of spreading the suburbs of a city into the countryside.
I take your point though – you didn’t live in a town, city or suburb. i can’t really speak to that. It seems to me that human beings have always tended to clump together. I guess, for me, the debate is how best to accomplish that.
Rural living has always been a part of American life. This is a traditional sort of living pattern, that is ecological, aestetically wonderful, and probably more family-oriented. I think that you would find more of a ‘community’ sense in a rural place than in most of today’s suburbs. Certainly, you are a perfect example of its merits.
Saying that “Those statements are baseless and comepletely untrue,” seems to me, unfair. True, I made an observation comparing the cultural and social effects of raising kids in cul-de-sacs carved out of the countryside, vs. a traditional town or city neighborhood, and this may seem generalized. I will say, however that i am not the first person to write about or have experience with this problem.
Take, for instance, the observation of Andres Duany, a noted urban planner and New Urbanist:
Children suffer from a loss of autonomy in suburbia. In this environment where all activities are segregated and distances are measured on the odometer, a child’s personal mobility extends no farther than the edge of the subdivision. The result is a new phenomenom: the “cul-de-sac kid,” the child who lives as a prisoner of a thouroughly safe and unchallenging environment.
Dependent always on some adult to drive them around, children and adolescents are unable to practice at becoming adults… Typical suburban parents give their children an allowance, in order to empower them and encourage independence. “Feel free to spend it any way you like,” they say. The child then says, “Thanks, Mom. When can you drive me to the mall?”
You’ve got to remember that this is in context of a larger movement of families from urban to suburban environments over the past 50 years. Again, it’s about the big picture. I think, when talking about rural dwellers, you’re operating under a different list of assumptions and observations. (and there are wonderful traditional town centers in the country).
I have first hand experience of suburbia (growing up), urban-living (these past 5+ years), and i’ve read several books on town and city planning. You accuse me of being general, but i think it’s a lack of general, communally-focused critics that have gotten us into this mess. I’m certainly interested in exceptions to my generalizations, but there is a problem here and it is time that it got addressed.
I think that we’re taught in school to reject harmful generalizations (such as stereotypes), but more often than not we choose to reject ALL generalization as “bad”. This refusal of many nice liberal people to make ANY kind of value judgement, means that we get the lowest common denomenator – art that involves feces, crappy hollywood films, and 7-11 parking lots. I TOTALLY SUPPORT ARTISTS – they can be both reflective of our culture, and they can lead our culture. There should be a place for Robert Mapplethorpe. But we reap what we sow.
SO i’m not saying we should regulate morality in any way – we should instead focus on creating an environment that is nuturing, satisfying and positive. There are conflicting political cultures in America – and I am of the ‘community’ variety. We’ve had 50 years of the individualists having their way. Maybe it’s time to re-evaluate.
nah
always putting your best effort in there, danno.
anyway, i added a planning news feed to the site. not sure how good it is, or if it will last. but we’ll see.
saw something interesting in Charlotte, NC a while back. The city limits are way way out past where there is any real development- a few houses and apartment buildings, but mostly just nothing. i guess the benefit is that the city has to grow a lot before there will be any “suburbs.” maybe the problem is that cities are too eager to create their own boundaries.
yes, or they can’t. amherst isn’t going to help the city swallow itself.
How do you feel about all of this, sara?
i read in the art voice that james pitts, in another obstructionist move, said recently that buffalo absorbing its suburbs won’t work because it didn’t in indianapolis. so maybe having a state or regional governmental body determine where development ends — a line in the countryside — is a way of countering pitts. that way, you can’t just move the suburbs farther out, as in indianapolis.
i donno.