What is a 21st-century
neighborhood? A 21st
century is an environment where there is much diversity within a neighborhood.
A 21st century neighborhood has wealthy citizens living next door to
the poor. However, it is described in Sampson’s last chapter that the
perception is that of decay and segregation.
How tied is it to the
past? Neighborhoods appear
to be tied to the past, according to Sampson’s text, relative to their nature.
Meaning the “death corner” still has a relative proximity to having the same
results as it has in the past. The store owner being “shot in the back” which I
figure is a literal meaning is an example of the continuing habits of the old “death
corner”.
Why? As Sampson stated, the individual intervention method is not
effective in making the changes necessary difference to alter the future
relative to its past. Meaning without any broad scale intervention the habits
of neighborhoods will remain the same throughout the future of the
neighborhood.
What will a
22nd-century neighborhood look like? A
22nd century neighborhood will look very similar to a 21st
century neighborhood without a neighborhood sized intervention. It seems, as
evident from Sampson’s research, that neighborhoods stay fairly consistent over
time. As Sampson’s conclusions suggests, the only way to alter the future path
of a neighborhood is with broad scale intervention.
Is community dying,
thriving, or just bumbling along, about the same now as always? I think (which means little to no research backing my
opinion) that community is dying a little. It could be “bumbling along” meaning
that community is altering rather than dying. However, I feel that the altering
community has been causing the sense of community to die a little. For example,
without the modern technology (such as internet, cell phones, planes, etc.) it
was more common for community to be closer in proximity physically. With the
modern technology communities are physically distant and “real physical”
interaction is severely lessened. So it would depend on how you look at
community, is the goal physical contact or just mere communication?
Sampson argues that community is very much alive, regardless of the advancements in social networks and technology. Admittedly, I also tend to feel like communities are dying, but after reading this book, I'm not so sure. Like you said, it has a great deal to do with how you look at community, really. Community is constantly changing, so some things are growing while other things are dying. I think the key for real change within a community would be to figure out a way to harness the power of social media and technology and implement that technology into the communities. If leaders can figure out was to incorporate technology into a community level intervention, hopefully important aspects such as collective efficacy could improve.
ReplyDelete