A recent article on "City Life" had me fuming for a good portion of a morning.
Here in Canada, there exists a magazine called Saturday Night. The
editorial of the September issue written by Kenneth Whyte and entitled "In
Defence of Suburbs" praised the virtues of Rybczyinski's positivity
regarding the burbs though in a somewhat irresponsible way.
The author seemed to confuse suburbanites with suburban landscapes. Mr.
Whyte conducted a long rant against academics through history who had
reacted to the suburban bourgeoisie with a degree of snobbery. Their
malls... their lack of culture... "the mink and manure dressage set"
All I was convinced of by the editorial was that it is wrong to prejudge
suburbanites (like myself, I must add) simply because of where they live.
My point in bringing this article into the forum of debate is that perhaps
Mr. Whyte's arguments indicate something about enthusiasm for Mr.
Rybczyniski's writings. There is a
definite antagonism between urbanites and suburbanites here in Toronto. It
seems (as was apparent in local issues brought forward by Mr. Whyte) that
suburbanites are tired of urbanites peering down their noses at them. A
difference in lifestyles between those who live in compact neighbourhoods
and those who do not is not cause for justifying the suburban landscape.
Whether or not I think suburbia has its valuable elements is not the
concern of my argument. Perhaps personal agendas, where we live, and differing
social
position, age, etc. are colouring our view of differing metropolitan
landscapes too much.
Mr. Whyte's editorial is a perfect example of misguided logic. Tired of
urban snobbery, he uses it to defend sprawling suburban landscapes.
PERIF (ery) 0;( ;b20085@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
PERI/FER/E/PERI/FER/EEE/FER/E/IE/PERIFER/IE/PERIII/FER/EE/PERIFI/EREEE/
Here in Canada, there exists a magazine called Saturday Night. The
editorial of the September issue written by Kenneth Whyte and entitled "In
Defence of Suburbs" praised the virtues of Rybczyinski's positivity
regarding the burbs though in a somewhat irresponsible way.
The author seemed to confuse suburbanites with suburban landscapes. Mr.
Whyte conducted a long rant against academics through history who had
reacted to the suburban bourgeoisie with a degree of snobbery. Their
malls... their lack of culture... "the mink and manure dressage set"
All I was convinced of by the editorial was that it is wrong to prejudge
suburbanites (like myself, I must add) simply because of where they live.
My point in bringing this article into the forum of debate is that perhaps
Mr. Whyte's arguments indicate something about enthusiasm for Mr.
Rybczyniski's writings. There is a
definite antagonism between urbanites and suburbanites here in Toronto. It
seems (as was apparent in local issues brought forward by Mr. Whyte) that
suburbanites are tired of urbanites peering down their noses at them. A
difference in lifestyles between those who live in compact neighbourhoods
and those who do not is not cause for justifying the suburban landscape.
Whether or not I think suburbia has its valuable elements is not the
concern of my argument. Perhaps personal agendas, where we live, and differing
social
position, age, etc. are colouring our view of differing metropolitan
landscapes too much.
Mr. Whyte's editorial is a perfect example of misguided logic. Tired of
urban snobbery, he uses it to defend sprawling suburban landscapes.
PERIF (ery) 0;( ;b20085@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
PERI/FER/E/PERI/FER/EEE/FER/E/IE/PERIFER/IE/PERIII/FER/EE/PERIFI/EREEE/