Being from a small town, I grew up with a unique perspective on community. When you live with 700 other people, you can’t escape it – for all its good and all its bad.
I was asked recently why I instantly warmed-up to a community in Ottawa but have been repelled by an almost identically-composed community in London.
I knew there was a difference and I could feel it, but it’s been difficult to pinpoint.
Recently I’ve had a similar feeling over another completely separate community in London. Something hasn’t quite felt right and I couldn’t put my finger on it.
I’ve come to realize that while everything about a community can be the same, the subtle foundation of its existance makes a world of difference.
Driven Communities
Driven communities are brought together by a specific cause or interest. Profession, religion, hobby…these groups are formed – formally or informally – around a specific purpose.
Members become part of that community because it represents part of themselves. They participate because it gives them something spiritually, professionally, recreationally or socially.
Driven communities are satellites to people’s existing social networks and lives.
Community Driven
Community Driven communities are more organic. They’re often still formed around a common interest but as the community evolves, that common bond can become incidental to the bond of the community itself: Community for the sake of community.
Community driven communities are more of a country, with a hodgepodge of citizens that may be different but they all share a common identity. That identity leads to specific issues and interests the citizens may share together but the community always comes before the issue or interest.
Community-driven communities are often an integral part of the identities of the members. Relationships outside are either welcomed as in-laws or become the satellites.
To me these communities are like families. There’s always the crazy one and the one you always argue with, but there’s something deeper there than just a shared love of knitting. Members aren’t just part of the knitting club – they’re ‘knitters’.
It can be extremely difficult to tell the difference from the outside of a community (and they can certainly transform) but the difference is tremendous.
I have found that London is full of many driven communities but not many community-driven communities.
I think the reason I haven’t seen the ‘community’ here yet is because I’m still looking for a community-driven community. I’m not sure if it’s in the cards (or culture) here to find it.
“Community driven communities are more of a country, with a hodgepodge of citizens that may be different but they all share a common identity. That identity leads to specific issues and interests the citizens may share together but the community always comes before the issue or interest.”
You’ve totally hit the nail on the head
…..I too grew up with a community-driven mentality (although Hamilton is a much bigger city).
There is always a sense that what people do in their work and/or recreation contributes to or detracts from the city in some way…..
in London there’s no sense of real pride in what you’re doing or where you’re living.
Of course, there are individual exceptions to this rule, but they are few and far between.
Thanks for the great post. After returning to London after 11 years on Vancouver Island I can definitely say that the community-driven community is a tough one to find here.
there are pockets for sure, but as far as a city-wide feeling of civic identity is concerned – the forest city’s leaves have fallen.
i also think you’ve got a whole other post in there about “culture” vs “cultures” around here.
thanks for the insight!
It’s interesting you mention that James. When I wrote this post, I was thinking of smaller communities: Two churches, a music-scene community, and two professional-networking groups specifically. It’s interesting how, by generalizing it’s being taken in a much broader sense.
But I think that’s okay….I envision the ideal community-driven-communities as existing inside one another instead of separate from another.
I wonder which comes first.
Great articulation. I’m part of a “community garden” this summer, which is certainly not a “garden community” — the expressed and overt reason we are doing it is to hang out and, quite frankly, gardening is just an excuse to do it. (Evidenced by the fact we have no clue what we are doing!)
That said, I also think there is a balance. Dietrich Bonhoeffer wrote that “A person who loves community tends to destroy it. But a person who loves people creates community wherever he goes.” I propose that whatever we do (work, school, hobbies, etc) should not just be a context for “building community” but rather a platform for learning how to love others.
Love is, by nature (or at least in my definition) self-sacrificial, contrasted to the temptation to seek community for selfish reasons. Yes: community is give-and-take, we need it, as a fundamental part of our communal DNA as humans, but the irony is that it follows the emptying of ourselves into others rather than the receiving of ‘community’ into our lives. At least this is how I interpret Bonhoeffer’s quote above (which rattled my preconceived notions of ‘community’ when I first came across it).
Pingback: Online London - 2009/05/10 - From My Bottom Step