[QatzelOk]

The way we structure our towns affects our social lives in a major way.



Above is an example of a traditional Quebec farming area layout from during the Seigneurial system which lasted, as a typical planning model, right up to the early 1900s.

It was considered a good model by the Quebecois because it maximized the potential for cooperation and socialization by putting the houses as close together as possible (on farms) and perfectly parallel to one another. Multiple families often lived in the houses, spreading out onto thinner and thinner slivers of farm.

This model allowed Quebec culture to survive against all odds for hundreds of years.

Compare this to its polar opposite, the suburban cul-de-sac sub-division below:



This model takes away possibilities for socialization and cooperation by isolating houses as much as possible from one another (in an urban setting) with hedges, driveways, busy roads, and other "moat" like structures.

Remember, the Quebec example is farmland, while the suburban model is urban. The old, traditional farming model is more social than today's American URBAN model of development. That's a pretty sad thing to say about our American cities - that they're less social (urban) than Quebec farmland was a few centuries ago.

Is the American suburban model of cul-de-sac bungalow sprawl destroying our cultures?

Has it already destroyed many of us? (our cultures, our capacity to participate in one)

[Ummon]

I could buy it. It would be interesting to do agent based modelling on something like this.

[Le Rouge]

Of course, but it also re-creates culture. This is Shivaic cultural grammatology one-zero-one. It destroys both urban street culture and rural folk culture of the village commons and creates a new intersectionality of cultures best described as half-Wysteria Lane, half-Bit-Torrent for its ultra-privatized commons and reliance (particularly obscene reliance) on Internet. The suburbs has created conditions by which the primary means of culture is the Internet, otherwise likewise media. The other option being the culture by car ultra-privatized social groups of iParenting.

[Godstud]

I'm glad that even the French decided that they prefer living like this.

Montreal.


Quebec City

[Ganeshas Rat]

He is who destroys city culture, not some suburbs.

[The Awakener]

I agree with the OP quite a bit. Is it a coincidence that real street culture usually developed in the more cluttered urban sprawl? The suburbs are the pinnacle of antisocial planning.

In Israel this has always been an interesting issue. The kibbutzim have originally been an attempt at returning to the models of the peasant-commune, but are currently finishing transformation into suburbs, fences being erected and farmlands divided and worked by forgein labour.

[kobe]

Malvina Reynolds - Little Boxes

I hate suburbs. That's not to say that I think we should go back to the model that OP talks about, but certainly we need to focus more on urban planning and social housing that will allow us to make use of more spaces and allow more organic socialization. Suburbs cultivate a culture of over-consumption and competition, which makes it the perfect model for capitalist housing.

The issue here is private property. Market forces will dictate such planning because in the short term it enriches the investors and provides security at the same time, because that model of housing has been shown to be immensely profitable.

[QatzelOk]

The issue here is private property. Market forces will dictate such planning because in the short term it enriches the investors and provides security at the same time, because that model of housing has been shown to be immensely profitable.

Exactly. The capitalist model thrives on precarious and low-quality housing choices for regular mortals. The forces of finance redrew our communities to turn us into culture-less consumer drones. And that is because of both the corporate elite's obsession with hucksterism, and their separation from the regular schmoes via class segregation allowed by both the tramway suburb, and then the private car. The private car is another culture-destroying wall between potential cooperators.

real street culture

That's where urban dwellers (and rural Quebec dwellers) traditionally have developed their social skills. Now, they simply don't develop social skills at the same level. With a low level of social skills, no indigenous culture can develop, and whatever remnants of a culture was there (before suburbia), shrinks like a steroid-user's testicles.

the French

The pictures you posted were of inner suburbs. If you go about another 40 km, you will find forest-and-farmland-consuming exurbs like this one (Blainville):

The people who live here have TV-internet lives. They don't live in Quebec, they live on Quebec soil as aliens to the local culture.

So I agree with you. Our suburbs are ruining our culture. The francophone Quebecois who grow up in the burbs of Montreal or Quebec City emerge as adults from their geometric bungalow labyrinth as uncooperative and socially awkward as anglophones.

creates a new intersectionality of cultures best described as half-Wysteria Lane, half-Bit-Torrent for its ultra-privatized commons

The Ultra-privatized commons are a lot like healthy-themed junk food. Fruit roll-ups, McDonalds salads, etc. A reality-themed lie.

[Decky]

I kind of agree with Qatz that the older places are nicer but I don't know if it is even possible to make newly build places have the same soul and livability as old ones. I wouldn't want to live anywhere less than 100 years old myself and ideally far older than that.