Another method of screening out activity is known as urban reserve, whereby people withhold parts of themselves during social interaction. For example, in buying something, city dwellers are mainly concerned with how the other person can adequately fill their needs. Their thinking has compartmentalised people’s actions into those that further their own interests and those that do not. City residents, thus, tend to focus on self-interest to minimise sensory overload (Simmel as discussed in Pampel, F. 2000 p.150).
However such cold, impersonal behaviour has a de-humanising effect, creating antipathy and aversion towards others. This impersonality is further reinforced by what Simmel refers to as the money economy of which a metropolis such as London is home to: ‘Throughout the whole course of English history, London has never acted as England’s heart, but often as England’s intellect and always her money bag’ (Simmel, G. in Antheas, F. & Kelly, M. 1995)
The money economy (trade, cash nexus, contracts, markets etc.) produces a spirit of objectivity and calculability. People interact with others because they want to exchange products and services for money. This is a detached, objective relationship that eliminates personal aspects of exchange. Due to the huge number of people in a modern economy, interaction must remain impersonal and although money ties us to many people, such ties are only a ‘means to an end, rather than end in themselves’ (Simmel as discussed in Pampel, F. 2000 p. 153).
Furthermore, money emphasizes intellect rather than personal feeling. The use of money requires an objective calculation that distances people from their emotions. Consequently, People come to think of the qualitative differences of things in terms of “how much?” Exchange effectively transforms qualities into quantities as illustrated by insurance companies who pay out money for the loss of a leg or eye (Simmel as discussed in Pampel, F. 2000 p.154).
Therefore, Simmel’s description of the effects of the metropolis on personality is both positive and negative. While an increase in group size emancipates the individual from the personal and emotional controls of more intimate groups, it nevertheless undermines individuality and creates a ‘coldness’ among city residents who have become indifferent and averse towards others.
One particular sociologist, Louis Wirth, was strongly influenced by Simmel’s work, and in 1938, he published a famous article called ‘Urbanism as a way of life,’ which in many ways can be seen as an extension and modification of Simmel’s work and provides an extensive account of the influences that city life exerts upon personality and social life (Wirth as discussed in Saunders, P. 1986 p.97).
Wirth’s analysis of the social effects of size is similar to that of Simmel. He develops the familiar argument that an increase in size leads to greater variation, which he suggests will be illustrated by the spatial segregation of different groups according to ethnicity, race, occupation, status etc. Like Simmel, he posits that any community, which extends beyond a few hundred members, limits the possibility that each member of the collective can know all the others personally. Increased group size is therefore directly related to the increased impersonality and superficiality of interpersonal relationships (Wirth as discussed in Smith, M. 1980 p.15). Emphasis is subsequently placed on secondary rather than primary contacts, as people no longer invest the whole of their personality in relationships. This has a number of psychic consequences. Acquaintanceships become more segmental, that is, they tend to be role-based, involving impersonal, superficial and transitory relationships where people are seen as instrumental and utilitarian (Wirth as discussed in Smith, M 1980 p.15).
This heightened superficiality, anonymity and transitoriness of interpersonal relationships, contributes to the increased spirit of rationality and sophistication in urban residents, which undermine
traditional, personal and emotional controls over people (Wirth as discussed in Smith, M. 1980 p.15)
For Wirth, the effects of an increase in density are clearly related to the effects of size. Density reinforces the effects of numbers by further differentiating human activity and adding to the complexity of the social structure (Wirth, L. 1938 in Kasinitz, P. 1995)
Close physical contact engendered by high density ‘produces a shift in the mediums through which we will orient ourselves to the urban milieu’ and to our fellow citizens. We become insensitive to personal inner eccentricities and external visual identity becomes increasingly important in establishing social expectations (Wirth as discussed in Smith, M. 1980 p.16). The complex differentiation of functions in a city means that individuals relate to each other on the basis of their specific roles. People are stereotyped before hand by uniforms, artefacts and other visual symbols of status or role. Furthermore, Wirth notes that the process of differentiation creates homogenous sub-groups which congregate together in different parts of the city. As a consequence the city resembles a ‘mosaic of social worlds’ (Wirth, L. 1938 in Kasinitz, P. 1995) and the city resident is exposed to glaring contrasts between ‘splendour and squalor, between riches and poverty, intelligence and ignorance, order and chaos.’ (Wirth as cited in Kasinitz, P. 1995). In being exposed to such juxtapositions of diverse social worlds, the individual develops a toleration of differences and divergent ways of life, which helps reduce social friction and social conflict (Wirth as discussed in Smith, M. 1980 p.17)
Finally, Wirth asserts that heterogeneity creates segmental and transitory patterns of social behaviour. Individuals participate in many different intersecting social circles, none of which require their complete allegiance. So, individual participation in group life of a mobile fluid society does not anchor a person in a fixed sense of meaning and identity. As a result, instability and personal insecurity can arise (Wirth as discussed in Saunders, P 1986 p.102). Heterogeneity also leads to a process of levelling where by the individual must subordinate some of his individuality to mass movements. Under conditions of cash nexus, mass markets, mass advertising and mass production, urban institutions become adjusted according to the needs of the “average person” and the needs of particular individuals are neglected (Wirth as discussed in Smith, M. 1980 p.17).
In describing the effects of city life, Simmel and Wirth were particularly referring to European metropolises such as Paris or Berlin. The sociologist Richard Sennett however, also explored the social structure of contemporary American cities, such as Chicago.
Sennett argues that because of the desire to detach “the self” from the painful involvement and seemingly random chaos of the outside world, people often impose, prematurely, a rigid self-definition on situations they may encounter, prior to actually having experienced such situations. This clear-cut sense of personal identity operates as a defence against the apparent confusion of external events, but also serves to alienate the individual from actual participation in life and undermines the developmental self (Sennett as discussed in Smith, M. 1980 p.154).
Sennett claims that at times, these wishes to ‘purify experience’ spread through a social system and come to manifest themselves in families and even entire social communities, which, fearful of painful confusion and disorder, build isolating social structures that shield them from disturbing influences yet denies them vitality, surprise and growth (Sennett as discussed in Smith, M. 1980 p.154). Sennett argues that the myth of sameness and communal solidarity created by “purified communities” leads to a negation of the individual uniqueness and human diversity present in cities. Diversity and dissent are thus repressed.
According to Sennett, contemporary American cities have lost a significant amount of vitality, diversity and heterogeneity because of the development of homogenous, residential enclaves. He cites the middle-class Chicago neighbourhood called union Park, as an empirical example. (Sennet as discussed in Smith, M. 1980 p.155). The residents of Union Park were able to shut themselves off from contact with the rest of the city and avoid any urban conflict.
As a result, the fathers in Union Park were unable to prepare their children to cope with the constantly changing urban society and its conflicting demands. Family life was shielded and intense. A premium had been placed on personal intimacy and as a result, little time, effort or psychic energy was expended outside personal relationships and the self-sufficient family life. Because of this intensive family life, public figures such as politicians come to be judged on personal criteria and personal appeal rather than their public position (Sennet as discussed in Smith, M. 1980 p.157). In addition, Sennett contends that in this sort of environment, people will run away from conflict rather than try to deal with it, for the absence of regular confrontation with “the stranger” weakens the public rituals once found to be useful in encouraging civility (Sennett as discussed in Smith, M. 1980 p.154).
In conclusion, it appears that the psychic effects of city life on its residents are both positive and negative. On the one hand, it seems that the city dweller becomes tolerant and sophisticated. His or her sense of personal freedom is considerably heightened, due to the sheer size of the city. On the other hand, the metropolis reduces the quality of relationships with others. Feelings of Impersonality, indifference and antipathy increase, and a person’s individuality is undermined and subordinated to the mass. A sense of isolation and anonymity can arise. Furthermore, the development of over protective environments such as zoned residential enclaves in which intense family life and personal relations dominate, stultifies human experience of the outside world.
