Ray Oldenburg is an "urban sociologist" according to Wikipedia, a source trusted and relied upon by many despite its fluid character. I was pointed to his work recently in response to a post on this blog regarding our return to normalcy in the wake of the great pandemic of 2020. In Uncle Buck to Ray Kinsela (July 2021), I referenced several Hollywood classics in describing my recent return to the theater environment for Black Widow (Marvel 2021). It was a great experience, but it led me to think about our (seemingly) growing tendency to introversion or isolation. That led a friend to refer me to Dr. Oldenburg’s work.
Dr. Oldenburg wrote on this topic of community, in a theme not unlike that of Robert Putnam's Bowling Alone (2000) referenced in the prior post. That was a lamentation and study of the decline in social interaction in our world. Dr. Putnam there explains his contentions of a "decline in civic engagement." His analysis is deep, and includes the rejection of multiple "usual suspects" for the findings, including education, family, government, and economics; the reader may or may not agree with his dismissals. Instead, he points toward "dramatic technological, economic, and social change" and the effects on the way people live.
Dr. Oldenburg wrote The Great Good Place (Third Places) in 1989. He followed that in 2002 with Celebrating the Third Place: Inspiring Stories about the "Great Good Places." His lamentations are similar to Putnam's, but are focused more on the somewhat systematic methods that have come to impact our socialization in America. One might argue that Oldenburg's focus is not dissimilar from Putnam's, but more focused on the structures and design that he sees as driving our increasing detachment. Thus, perhaps a valid distinction is that Putnam sees technology as a driver, and Oldenburg sees more impact from social planning.
Dr. Oldenburg suggests that our society is impacted today by the very design of our cities and towns. He laments the so-called “progress” of the mid-20th century and the expansion of the suburban American dream. These came with sidewalks that few people use, and without the kind of “informal social centers or informal public gathering places” that had become customary in urban living. Without backyards, that urban environment promoted socialization in parks, stoops, and streets. With the suburban evolution, personal vehicle dependency, and accommodating private spaces came an effect on socialization.
While many of us may accept this as our normal, and while the expanse of suburbanization may thus be implicated, the explanation of our socialization changes is arguably not complete. Dr. Oldenburg encourages us to think about our “third place(s),” in the context of socialization. He describes that for many of us our “first place” and “second place” are largely defined, with perhaps less than optimal freedom of choice. But our “third place” is more likely voluntary and discretionary.
To put this in context, the “places” have to do with our lifetime (not “lifetime”). Your “first place” is where you live and likely spend most of your time, albeit perhaps largely asleep. While you may largely control how your “first place” is arranged, decorated, and maintained, the location may be dictated or at least driven by economics, transportation, family needs, and more. Your “second place” is where you work. In the twentieth century that was largely dictated by employment, and in some realms that continues. However, a major impact and effect of our recent pandemic seems to be telecommuting and flexibility, thus more control perhaps of your "second place" in terms of arrangement and environment. However, it may also mix places.
This, of course, potentially creates challenges for us. I find myself fortunate to have worked for an open organization during the pandemic. I maintained the separation of “first” and “second” places, at least until some people didn't do something and we lost a bridge. However, a great many merged those two places into one place and did so in a time of limited social outlets and function. If Oldenburg is believed, that had to present challenges with definition, expectation, and separation. The impact of that on the young who were pushed into remote learning is likely to remain for some time. In a general sense, the young seem to have more drive for social engagement, but that potentially is anecdotal rather than empirical (I perhaps oversimplify in other words).
Dr. Oldenburg’s theme in these books is that something lies beyond these two, however, our “third places.” These are our “informal gathering places in which people gather between home and work.” He explains that these are a critical element of communities large ( city) and small (neighborhoods). These, he contends, must be “places where individuals may come and go as they please, in which no one is required to play host, and in which we all feel at home and comfortable." City parks, the beach (Florida has the most coastline of any state in the "lower 48," by a lot. That may win you a wager or two in your personal "third place.").
He explains that much of our socialization is purpose-driven, folding neatly back into the theme of Dr. Putnam's Bowling Alone. That lamentation is focused on the decline of leagues, clubs, and the like. But Dr. Oldenburg focuses us on the “pure sociability” in “which people get together for no purpose, higher or lower, than for the 'joy, vivacity, and relief' of engaging their personalities beyond the contexts of purpose, duty, or role." When did you last converse with a stranger in a park? In the pandemic, I noticed that my fellow pedestrians in the neighborhood became much more open to conversation beyond a mere greeting. Or, perhaps I became more open?
It is for these interactions, largely focused upon casual conversation, that the “neutral ground” of communities is so critical. He asserts that conversation in such settings is likely to become ordered in terms of content and even participation, which is intriguing. For example, the conversation may be more deferential and accommodating as regards “the regulars” in a particular environment, and those more sporadic or new may be expected to listen more and speak less until status is acquired. Thus, for your sake, there is perhaps a benefit in becoming a "regular" in your local park?
Dr. Oldenburg finds consistency thus in "third places,” similar to the obtention of seniority at work. He professes that there may be evolution of newcomer to “old-timer,” and this may be tied to both the particular “third place” or even to a particular time of day in that “third place.” Regardless of detail, there is thus a socialization and hierarchy possible or even probable in the "third place." In evolutionary and transitional senses, it is practical to consider that personal status within a "third place" may persistently change over time. On a recent errand, I paused to admire a new rental scooter on a sidewalk. A homeless man and I then conversed about the idea, how prevalent users were, and the day generally. It was an interesting and engaging interaction on the fringe of a public park, for no purpose other than interaction and community.
From, or in, our “third place,” we are perhaps able to find many attributes and advantages of socialization. Their potential to influence state and peace of mind is likely enhanced by the fact that we are largely free to select our own “third place,” as well as our frequency and duration of experience. We are free to have multiple "third places," and to engage them as the mood suits at a moment. It is, likely, the one place(s) of the three over which we exercise the full dominion of choice, of course, limited by geographic and economic constraints, as well as the limitations imposed by other aspects of our individual existences. In our experience of the what and where we may frequent or not. But as importantly, perhaps we find a draw in the who of such a place?
In an interview with Dr. Oldenburg, he lamented his residence in a suburban community. In exemplifying his frustration, he cited the presence of ample sidewalks and the infrequency of their use. He elected to construct a social space in his garage, complete with refreshments. With some word-of-mouth promotion, he found the space occupied by neighbors and acquaintances on a reasonably regular schedule (several set times weekly). People would apparently show up casually to share his company, to engage, and to build community. They would bring food and drinks, sit and conversate. The concept perhaps throws back to Ray Kinsela more than one might think ("If you build it, they will come," or perhaps as aptly, "if you come, they will come").
This example highlights the simplicity of socialization in the context of community. The path is reasonably simple. Notably, in that experiment, Dr. Oldenburg turned his “first place” into someone else's “third place.” In creating a “third place” for others, he perhaps lost some measure of each from his own perspective. While the community impact is enviable, it raises questions as to the benefits of a distinct "third place." In Berlin, it is said, the locals similarly gather in casual and even spontaneous groups, but the setting is more often the large public greenspace of parks. One of note is the now decommissioned Templehof of Berlin Airlift fame, now a great gathering "third place" for a massive city.
A final consideration that is worthy of addressing is the seemingly likely probability that way too many of us have elected to disregard the “third place” whether that is in the context of Dr. Putnam's Bowling Alone (groups) or Dr. Oldenburg’s Third Place (localities). In their place, we have too widely and blithely accepted the simulation of socialization that is the World Wide Web, social media, text messaging, and email (information conduits). We see the detritus of this in our work and personal lives. Our "third" has perhaps become less of a "place" and merely a distraction within our "first" or "second."
Call me old fashioned (no seriously, you can call me Dave), but there is value in the human voice, countenance, and demeanor. There is value in conversation. I have often lamented, and reiterate here, that speaking with others is critical in workers’ compensation regardless of your profession. Certainly, information conduits are effective for rapidly moving data. Certainly, they can be interactive to a degree. But, as certainly, they lack the emotion, timber, tenor, and tone of verbal communication. As much as I encourage a phone call instead, I still encourage face-to-face. The phone call is “better,” but adding the visual is nonetheless “best.”
In this regard, let me plug once again the value of coming to a live mediation or hearing. There is more to the fabric of such an interaction than a video or telephone encounter. Come see your opponent, client, mediator, or judge. Be in the moment, of the moment, and enjoy all that comes with that. Make the OJCC one of your "third places," an interaction and even perhaps a distraction.
The theme of Robert Putnam's Bowling Alone is directed at structure and groups. His point supports your involvement in activities such as the local bar association, Inns of Court, service groups, non-profit volunteering, and more. In these, you will find socialization that is important. Certainly, some of these include some purpose and focus. They are perhaps less the distraction than a bowling league or similar, but they are nonetheless groups with the familiarity and comradery that are endemic. However, in the same theme, I encourage you to find, join, and engage such groups. From them flows a rich stream of interpersonal and commiserating interaction.
The critical point of Dr. Oldenburg is that you need to identify the place(s) and person(s) for socialization, beyond the group setting. Society today is less attuned to providing the contact potential, and these devices upon which we rely are pulling us toward isolation. Despite that, in your community, there are places in which such experience lingers. Try having a conversation about technology and scooters with a homeless man in a park, it is rewarding. Try discussing a person's dog with them on a walk. Try sitting in a park and merely greeting the passersby, perhaps engaging one more deeply on a topic.
It would be positive for us to know and appreciate our "third place," in any event. Do you have one? Did you know that you did? That is only more important perhaps as we find our "first" and "second" places commingled and intertwined in the age of telecommuting. It is more important as urban and suburban sprawl pulls us from each other. It is more important as technology makes our lives easier, yet infinitely less intimate and interactive.
Find a "third place." Strive to recognize the value of human interaction. Find commonality with people you meet in those places, and enjoy the community that emanates.
