Louis Wirth has made important contributions to sociology through his research on urban life and the social issues that face urban residents. He identified the key characteristics that define a city by suggesting that it can be studied as a physical structure, and a system of social organization, or as a set of attitudes and ideas. In his three suggestions, Louis started by understanding the challenges of the minority in the Nation’s Capital. Although this was not related to Marxist theory, Wirth built his sociological theory of human hostility in order to comprehend the dynamics of social life and human associations in the Nation’s capital (Gmelch, 2002).
According to him, social relations in the Nation’s capital are superficial and anonymous due to the complexity and rationality ascribed to its residents. The city dwellers tend to stand in a useful relationship in a manner that each has an overwhelming role in the life of the other. As a result, every resident gains a certain level of freedom from the emotional controls of friendly groups. In the Nation’s capital, there is spontaneous self-expression, confidence, and a sense of participation in communal activities, and this is the fruits of living together in an integrated society(Wirth, 1964).
The segmental and utilitarian nature of interpersonal connections in the city makes the residents have an institutional appearance in the creation of specialized tasks. However, these associations lead to predatory behaviors among the residents of the Nation’s capital, and this tends to hinder the efficient functioning of the respective groups.
The advantage that the capital has over other urban cities is that it has the capability of centralizing the resources of all its dwellers. According to Wirth, the fact that the Nation’s capital has a high density increases the complexity of its social structure and helps in diversification. He further suggests that the close physical relations of numerous residents in the city create a shift in the mediums through which the residents orient themselves to the urban milieu.
According to Wirth, the workplace is dissociated from home, and this is evident in the Nation’s capital due to the closeness of industrial and other business establishments that make the city both economically and socially unsuitable for residential purposes.
Population numbers, land values, convenience, prestige, and other factors such as the absence of noise pollution affect the desirability of various cities as residents for different segments of the populace. This is evident in the Nation’s capital, where different parts of the town have different functions. The Nation’s capital, therefore, tends to bear a resemblance to a mosaic of social associations in which the shift from one to another is sudden.
The concurrence of divergent personalities and ways of life tend to generate a relativistic perception and a sense of toleration of disparities, which Wirth regards as “prerequisites for rationality.” According to Wirth, “The close living together and working together of individuals who have no sentimental and emotional ties foster a spirit of competition, aggrandizement, and mutual exploitation” (Wirth, 1964).
When talking of the city as a system of social organization, Wirth states that social associations among diverse personalities in the urban milieu tend to abolish the strictness of caste lines as well as sophisticate the class structure, and this creates a more ramified and differentiated structure of social stratification as is experienced in the Nation’s capital. The heightened mobility of the dwellers is what makes the town to be a social organization.
As a set of attitudes and ideas, a city is composed of large numbers of distinctly constituted persons, and since these different individuals have to make use of the same facilities and institutions, then changes in attitudes and ideas have to occur so as to meet the needs of all the residents in the city. As a result, all public utilities, including entertaining, educational, and cultural bodies, have to be adjusted to meet these needs, and this is a characteristic of the Nation’s capital (Gmelch, 2002).
In conclusion, Wirth defines urbanism as a distinctive mode of life which can be empirically approached from three interrelated perceptions. As a physical structure, the city is composed of a population base, expertise, and ecological order. Wirth’s second suggestion talks of a city as a system of social organization and this comprises a distinct special structure, numerous social institutions, and an ordinary pattern of social connections.
As a set of attitudes and ideas, Wirth defines the city as a constellation of personal characteristics that are involved in different collective behaviors and are subject to mechanisms of social control. It is clear that the above three suggestions are evident in the Nation’s capital.
References
Gmelch, G. (2002). Urban life: readings in the anthropology of the city. Prospect Heights: Waveland Press.
Wirth, L. (1964). Louis Wirth on cities and social life. Chicago, University of Chicago Press.