How have sociologists described the effects of modern city life on people’s psychic lives? (Simmel, Wirth and Sennett) The dominant modern experience is essentially urban. That is to say, modern experience is largely played out in cities which provide people with a radically different quality of life compared to that of a more rural, traditional existence that is characteristic of small settlements and rural villages.
Sociologists such as Simmel and Wirth have cited significant features of city life such as size, density and heterogeneity in an attempt to analyse the character of social relationships attributed to the metropolis and the effects that such features have on the psychic lives of its residents. For the sociologist Goerg Simmel, the metropolis was the crucible of modern life’ (Simmel as discussed in Saunders, P. 1986, p. 95).
In a well-known article, “The Metropolis and Mental Life”, Simmel explored the consequences of city life for social interaction and highlighted some the psychic effects of living in the metropolis. In Simmel’s work it is possible to discern three core themes: size, division of labour and money/rationality. The effects of all three are readily visible and most intensely felt in the city (Simmel as discussed in Saunders, P. 1986, p. 93). In physical terms, the sheer size of the city is significant and has implications on personal freedom and individual distinctiveness.
The larger the social group, the more impersonal, fleeting and standardised group interaction becomes. The individual’s commitment to the larger group lessens, for as groups expand, individuals start to spread their commitments across social circles and a greater sense of personal freedom is created. However such expansion threatens to ‘immerse the individual within the mass’ (Simmel as discussed in Saunders, P. 1986 p. 91). The increased impersonality of group interaction means that group members become less concerned with the unique personal qualities of others.
Faced with this attack on their individuality, people in a metropolis are driven to emphasize their own subjectivity by exaggerating their particular attributes and by adopting a Blasi?? attitude of indifference towards others which highlights the distinctiveness of self (Simmel as discussed in Saunders, P. 1986 p. 93). In such an environment where individual freedom is encouraged and individuality is undermined, people start to feel a sense of isolation and a lack of meaning.
In economic terms, the metropolis is home to a high economic division of labour. This extreme differentiation is due to the size of the city, and further serves to intensify an individual’s city life (Simmel as discussed in Pampel, C. 2000 p. 149). The constant exposure to a variety of rapidly changing situations intensifies nervous stimulation and reinforces the consciousness of self, for a person’s own unique personality is the only constant factor (Simmel as discussed in Saunders, P. 1986 p.92): ‘The city sets up a deep contrast with small town and rural life with reference to the sensory foundations of psychic life.
The metropolis extracts from man as a discriminating creature a different amount of consciousness than does rural life’ (Simmel, G. in F. Atheas and M. Kelly 1995). Overloaded by sensations, impressions and a myriad of encounters and exchanges, the city resident develops particular coping strategies in order to avoid mental exhaustion and maintain some ‘inner core’ (Simmel as discussed in Pampel, F. 2000 p. 149).
One method of coping is simply by ignoring the surrounding environment, which is known as the blasi?? attitude. The urban dweller adopts an “I’ve seen it all before” approach to city life, which enables him/her to navigate the metropolis without undermining his/herself (Simmela as discussed in Pampel, F. 2000 p. 149). 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).