Urbanism As a Way of Life

Wirth begins his article by describing a city using density, heterogeneity and size (large and permanent) as his three main focal points, attempting to gain a better understanding of what we may define as a city.  In my experience, coming from a small town near the Wisconsin border, the city may be described using Wirth's main points as defining characteristics.  The density and size of the city were the most obvious things that caught my eye the first time I visited.  All the buildings were incredibly close together, cars lined the streets, hundreds of people were on the same sidewalk and even the air felt a little bit thicker.  The city was also filled with many different types of people.  As Wirth describes in Urbanism as a way of life,  "the heightened mobility of the individual, [brings] him within the range of stimulation by a great number of diverse individuals."  This was also holding true to Wirth's definition, as everywhere I turned there were what seemed to be very different people all in the same group, standing outside of a building, talking; no two people were the same.

However, in moving into Taylor Lofts, I realized that the only reason I would agree with Wirth is because I was an outsider.  I lived in a very different environment for most of my life, and the city was simply different.  Now that I have the chance to actually live the city life, I realize that Wirth missed a few things.  One thing I cannot argue with is the size and density of the city.  However, the heterogeneity is a bit skewed in Wirth's definition.  Once you live in the city, you begin to see that it is not so heterogeneous at all.  Neighborhoods and even streets are divided by different ethnicities, cultures, genders, age, etc.  Walking one block will bring you to an entirely different group of people without even realizing it.

Wirth also does not touch on how fast paced the city is.  No matter what you are doing or where you are going, you have to get there as quickly as you can.  This is why one may not notice the difference in the "heterogeneity" of the city.  People are too submerged into trying to keep up with the pace of the city, that they do not notice the changes in the blocks, people and buildings they are walking past- leading to skewed definitions of the city. The only thing heterogeneous about the city is that they all move together in an orderly fashion, never breaking from their organized pattern of movements unless they are ducking into a building to go to work.

Furthermore, Wirth does not look at how the media affects the people in the city; it gives us a definition of the city all on its own.  The city is big, fast and dangerous according to the media-which only emphasizes our need to be running around like chickens with our heads cut off for fear of being late, and increases our fear of certain avenues or blocks when in reality they aren't so bad.  The media molds us as a people, and most city dwellers never think to deviate from their media stricken roles.

However, even though our modern world is much different, there are definitely still characteristics that With observed to be true about the city life. I did enjoy reading Wirth's article none the less as it gave me a new perspective on the city, and a base to draw new conclusions that fit our modern world.