The Suburban Ideal and Suburban Dependence on the Urban

Urban areas, those high population density and built up places, are the epicenters of our modern world. Over the centuries urbanization has brought upon the rise of big cities as the epicenters of human culture, economy and society. While cities have thrived and become great wealth centers, eventually dissatisfaction with the urban was bound to happen. Dissatisfaction with the urban was due to a large variety of reasons, but itself it was the primary cause of creation of the suburban ideal. The progression of the dissatisfaction with the urban into the suburban ideal and of the suburban ideal into a tangible thing is quite logical. Crabgrass Frontier: The Suburbanization of the United States by Kenneth T. Jackson, he illustrates this progression of the suburban ideal and thus supports the idea that the suburban depends on the urban. An urban area can be defined as a city center, or as a place of high population density or urban development. Contrarily, a suburban area is defined as a smaller community than a city and usually this means it is an outlying part of said city or town. Essentially, the suburban is a microcosm of the urban; it is the urban on a miniature scale. Yet, though they seem essentially the same but for different sizes, there are a number of additional features that cause urban and suburban areas to be different. For one, the demographics of suburban and urban areas are typically quite different. While cities tend to have poor inner-city neighborhoods, suburbs are typically white, middle-class residential areas. Urban areas have steadily grown over time, into the sprawling metropolises they are today. They have long been epicenters of wealth as well as epicenters of poverty. With the all of the benefits that a big city brings to a country and region, there are however a number of negatives that go hand in hand with cities as well. It is these negatives and the general dissatisfaction with the urban that finally caused the suburban ideal to