Changes shape life, sometimes they make it better, and sometimes they just let it be more intense. People definitely need a good dose of courage to change, especially when an innovation modifies permanently their lives. However, nowadays one can profit by many opportunities in every field, and this, perhaps, make changes inevitable. As an example for that, people can choose between a vast panorama of places where they would like to live and relocate their lives. According to Penelope Trunk’s experience, “Three years ago, I made a decision to move from New York City to Madison, WI based purely on research. I put economic development research together with positive psychology research. Then I combed the Internet for city statistics, and I moved. I had never been to Madison in my life, and you know what? It was a good decision.”(Trunk) However, people reject living country lives surrounded by crops to grow, so more than a half prefers exploring the nature just for vacations. This phenomenon is shown by The Guardian’s statistics, in which a worldwide analysis shows the urban populations’ percentage of 2010. For example, the study has verified that in U.S.A. the 82.3% of the population lives in cities. (Brown)
Consequently, today fundamental issues concern cities, and how they affect people. How do people live in modern cities? How do they live in traditional ones? Modern metropolis and traditional cities are really different from one another. Above all, dividing cities in these two categories can highlight diverse points of view. According to Robert Adam, in an article published by the City Journal, he states: “There is so much about the modern city that is wrong… In traditional cities like Siena in Italy or Bath in England we can...
... middle of paper ...
...2 April 2012.
9. Modafferi, Antonio “Vivere a Siena” quicalabria.it Ammega, Business Solutions June. 2007. Web. 4 April 2012.
10. Silverman, Sydel. “On the uses of history in anthropology: The ‘palio’ of Siena.” American Ethnologist 6.3 (1979): 413-436. Print.
11. Sinatra, Frank. “ New York, New York.” Trilogy: Past Present Future. Frank Sinatra, 1979. CD.
12. R.E.M. “ Leaving New York.” Around the Sun. Warner Bros, 2004. CD.
13. Rosenberg, Jennifer “The Empire State Building” history1900s.about.com The New York Times Company n.d. Web. 10 April 2012.
14. Suh, Annie “ What makes New York unique” annie-suh.suite101.com N.E. US Travel Oct. 2008. Web. “ 20 April 2012.
15. Trunk, Penelope “ How to decide where to live “ blog.penelopetrunk.com Penelope Trunk May 2009. Web. 26 April 2012.
16. Unesco “Historic Centre of Siena.” Unesco World Heritage Centre. n.d.
...or present day cities Canada. Repeatedly there have been works of research that supports the idea that people are beginning to have the want and the need to live an area where there is walkability and convenience. From the perspective of a Millennial as society likes to call my generation, having the option to walk instead of drive is something to heavily consider when choosing a place to call home. The evidence as why people are moving is in a way demographically self-explanatory, a poor person would want to move from a city where crime is high, there is little to no property to invest in, and the schools seems are bad , to a place that boasts the opposite attributes.
Burrows, Edwin G., and Mike Wallace. Gotham: A History of New York City to 1898. New York: Oxford UP, 1999. Print.
Home to a futuristic society, Metropolis (1927) by Fritz Lang, presents a city in which society has been physically divided to achieve perfection. According to Norden “With its motifs and its portrayal of workers as machinelike automatons (they even move about mechanically), 'Metropolis' unmistakably bears the mark of Futurism” (Norden 109). This society is divided into two classes: the thinkers who are the wealthy rulers of the city, and the workers, who work literally underground to provide for the city. Living in opulence, the audience is introduced to the ruler of the city Johann 'Joh' Fredersen (Alfred Abel) and his son Freder Frederson (Gustav Fröhlich). One day while indulging in his wealth at the Pleasure Garden, Freder catches sight of a beautiful women named Maria (Brigitte Helm). Freder becomes infatuated with Maria and decides to follow her into the underworld where the workers are. Freder quickly discovers that Maria is part of the working class and that she has been calling for unity between the workers and rulers of Metropolis. Enchanted by the cause, Freder attempts to help the workers, however, his father discovers the plan and attempts to sabotage it. To avoid the destruction of the tightly constructed social classes, Joh unites with an old colleague and nemesis, Rotwang (Rudolf Klein-Rogge). Together, Rotwang and Joh imprison the real Maria and they develop a robot version of Maria who encourages the workers to rebel against their ruler. The film ends with a climatic scene where Freder, in attempt to save the real Maria from Rotwang, pushes Rotwang from a cathedral roof where he falls to his death. Freder then returns to the city where he is finally able to unite the workers with the rulers, serving his purpos...
When Emerson walked down a city street, he did not come across anything extraordinary; nothing caught his eye or provoked him to meditate on his life, leaving him unsatisfied. The exuberant knowledge that Emerson attained, which modern society widely abandoned, was acquired through spending time in nature throughout his life. At one point in Emerson’s life, he left the woods; nonetheless, Emerson returned once he realized what was he was missing in his life. In today’s world, most people who leave cities or towns in an attempt to live more rurally would most likely never return to urban areas; however, convincing citizens to make such a transition is
Change is always difficult, whether the older generation is moving or reestablishing a way of living in the same place; the older generation has to make the big decision of what is best for their future. Carr and Kefalas have interviewed many people in
Forrest, R. and Kennett, P. (1997) ‘Risk, Residence and the Post-Fordist City,’ American Behavioral Scientist, 41: 342-59.
essence of New York and all its nuances in the form of terse observations. Whether
While many people continue to live their lives in cities, some may come to the impression that they are “wasteful.” The individual who strives to do their best to eventually reach their dreams, and gain the material things they desire might not seem very effective, compared to the one who is content with their simple, more “pure” life in some vast land away from the city. However, there is a better chance of seeing more people like the former rather than the latter. Certainly, most people today do not live on farms, vacant marshes, or vast deserts, and instead live in cities. Most often, those people would avoid living in such provincial places because of their distinct conditions. Although if we were to determine which type of life is more
New York City has always been an example of how diversity can exist in a successful and peaceful place. Full of action, enthusiasm, and a combination of many cultures, New York is rich in every sense of the word. For example, taking a walk down the busy streets not only opens your eyes to the small but meaningful details of the city and the different people that revive it but also the numerous worlds that are somehow fused in this magical city, like Little Italy, Chinatown, Little Syria, Korea Town, and many others.
"Giovanni Boccaccio." Encyclopaedia Britannica. Encyclopaedia Britannica Online Academic Edition. Encyclopædia Britannica Inc., 2013. Web. 24 Nov. 2013. .
Again, this section will give a working definition of the “urban question’. To fully compare the political economy and ecological perspectives a description of the “urban question” allows the reader to better understand the divergent schools of thought. For Social Science scholars, from a variety of disciplines, the “urban question” asks how space and the urban or city are related (The City Reader, 2009). The perspective that guides the ecological and the social spatial-dialect schools of thought asks the “urban question” in separate distinct terminology. Respected scholars from the ecological mode of thinking, like Burgess, Wirth and others view society and space from the rationale that geographical scope determines society (The City Reader, 2009). The “urban question” that results from the ecological paradigm sees the relationship between the city (space) as influencing the behaviors of individuals or society in the city. On the other hand...
When you associate anything with New York City it is usually the extraordinary buildings that pierce the sky or the congested sidewalks with people desperate to shop in the famous stores in which celebrities dwell. Even with my short visit there I found myself lost within the Big Apple. The voices of the never-ending attractions call out and envelop you in their awe. The streets are filled with an atmosphere that is like a young child on a shopping spree in a candy store. Although your feet swelter from the continuous walking, you find yourself pressing on with the yearning to discover the 'New York Experience'.
In the early nineteenth century, during the Industrial Revolution, Americans gradually began selling their farms and trading the common suburban life with the adventurous fast-pace urban life. Today the majority of the American population chooses to dwell in cities, towns or suburbs; however, there are still many families living the country lifestyle. What influences an individual to select one way of living over another? The area in which one's home is located has effects on their way of life. Urban living and suburban living both have advantages and disadvantages, and these characteristics are what greatly influences peoples' decisions about where they should live.
There are numerous differences between living in a small town or a big city. Small towns and big cities each have their unique advantages and disadvantages. Where a person grows up plays an integral part in shaping their personality. And, sometimes a person’s personality can have a great impact on their preference of where to live. Preferring a small town or big city is a very individual matter. Different people have different reasons for favoring one over the other. Personally, and admitting that my views are shaped by my personal experiences, I believe the advantages of growing up in a small town – as long as that small town is in reasonably close proximity to a decent sized city.
Imagine having to choose to reside in one place for the rest of your life. Which would you opt for? Some people would argue that the hyperactive lifestyle that a big city has to offer has more benefits than living in the country. However, others would contend that the calm and peaceful environment of the countryside is much more rewarding. Several people move from the city to a farm to get away from the hustle and bustle. Likewise, some farmers have traded in their tractors and animals to live a fast paced city life. Of course, not all large cities are the same nor are all of the places in the country identical. Realizing this, ten years ago, I decided to hang up the city life in Indiana to pursue a more laid back approach to life in rural Tennessee. Certainly, city life and life in the country have their benefits, but they also have distinguishable differences.