"The (Artificial) American Dream"
by Amy Thomas

If the American Dream had to be captured within a frozen image, how would the visualization be conveyed? For the majority of today's society, the image would likely include the traditional father, mother, and child(ren) standing pleasantly beside a moderate two story home, a well kept lawn, and neatly trimmed hedges. In the background of this family portrait, a guarded and welcoming neighborhood would appear, complete with similar home designs and family arrangements lining its streets. In other words, the image of the American Dream resides within the typical American suburb. And within this typical suburb lies (supposedly) the remaining components of the ideal American lifestyle.

From the moment William Levitt created the first official suburb in 1950, the suburban lifestyle has been viewed as practically utopian. This adopted myth has boosted suburbia into the most popular residency for Americans, housing approximately 138,23 1,000 or 55% of all Americans (Gillespie 4). For the average citizen, this popularity seems encouraging, assuming that the majority of our country's population is actively pursuing a lifestyle that includes a desire to work honestly and live modestly as well as to provide a stable and protected living environment for one's family. Unfortunately, things are not always as they appear. If examined closely, the popularity of America's suburbs is more disturbing than encouraging. Suburbia is actually a representation of the dehumanized characteristics that America's citizens have acquired and not a symbol of their wholesome zeal for a utopia. Using the American Dream as a facade, suburbia is simply a manufactured myth that allows Americans to disguise their diminishing family values, their hunger for socioeconomic status, and their lack of desire for social cohesion.

One of the key elements of the American Dream that is simultaneously associated with the suburban mythology is the traditional American family, complete with secure family values. Largely a result of the lifestyles portrayed on suburban-based television shows, the suburbs have consistently been deemed the ideal environment for the ideal family of high moral standards From the initial episodes of "Leave it to Beaver" in the 1950's to the modernized episodes of "Home Improvement" in the 1990's, suburban TV sitcoms have bombarded America with images of hard-working and devoted mother/father pairs who guide their essentially "normal" children through the obstacles of childhood and adolescence. As the television critic Michael V. Tueth revealed in a recent publication of the Journal of Popular Film and Television, these television shows allowed suburbia to evolve into the home of "parental wisdom and spousal forgiveness" as well as "children's fantasies and nonsense" (98). Surprisingly, because America's actual suburban children record and obtain overall success through adulthood, these television lifestyles did not seem too far-fetched. Unfortunately, through recent years, this affirmed connection between the suburbs and the "perfect" family environment has become more of an intended assumption rather than a reality.

While today's society places great significance on acquiring the appearance of the traditional America family, it places little, if any, importance on actually filling its shoes. When two teenagers recently opened fire in a Colorado high school, America stood in disbelief, not simply because the boys had randomly killed fifteen of their classmates, but because the boys had belonged to typical families who resided in popular Colorado subdivisions. Despite the argument of the suburban myth, the stability of strong family values within suburban homes does not seem to measure up to its American Dream standards. According to the June 5, 2000 issue of Alcoholism & Drug Abuse Weekly, "In a historic turnabout in the New York metropolitan area, more kids in the 7th through 12th grades in the suburbs (3.5 percent) reported using heroin than those in the city (2.5 percent)" (Rosenthal 5). Yet, appropriately, a woman in the article addressed the common suburban myth by stating that "the idea that a 'decent' kid from a 'good' family would steal to get his heroin fix was never part of the suburban equation" (6). Sadly, these frightening statistics reveal that the decision for suburban residency is no longer based on the concern of creating and maintaining a stable family environment. Nonetheless, with the popularity of the suburban area as well as the continuing portrayal of ideal suburban television families, it appears that Americans are concerned with maintaining this fictitious connection between family and suburbia.

Another aspect of the American Dream that the suburbs incorporate as part of their cunning illusion is the idea that suburbia is a refuge from the violent and ruthless ways of the city. Specifically since World War II, the city has been noted for housing all of the corrupt aspects of our society. As Yi-Fi Tuan reveals in her book Topophilia: A Study of Environmental Perception, Attitudes, and Cultural Politics, Americans continue to view city life as "a field of indifference to the rest of the world, as a triumph of objective over subjective, male over female, culture over nature, materialism over spirituality and idealism" (123). Because so many people have jobs within the city, suburbia emerged as a haven against all of the evil connotations that engulf urban residency and its residents. Therefore, as more city workers chose to locate themselves and their families in the suburbs rather than the city limits, they were automatically labeled as humanitarians who would rather protect their integrity and commute greater distances to work than conform to the depravity of city life. Unfortunately, as the suburbs gained rapid popularity, they also attracted a certain socioeconomic class of people. Even if this clustering of a particular status group was merely a coincidence, today's suburban residents have made this occurrence into one of their most significant (and ruthless) concerns.

Although the average price of a typical suburban home has risen in recent years to around $145,000.00, few residents or soon-to-be residents are complaining about the steady price increase. In fact, the underlying label of "expensive residency" tacked onto suburbia seems to be a greater reason for residency than the area's presumed shielding effect against the sinful arts of the city. When surveying a random sample of suburban residents, Nicholas Lemann, a journalist for The Atlantic, discovered that most of the people were "intensely aware of income distinctions within the community," which was a subject that, during past surveys, "rarely came up about suburbs" (38). From these findings, it becomes evident that suburban dwellers are, in fact, materialistic as well as viciously competitive, which are two of the city's corruptions that were supposedly prohibited in suburbia. Ironically, however, suburban life has yet to lose its "sheltering" image. Perhaps its myth remains unaltered because its residents resort to another form of city corruption -- the evil of deception. Suburban residents hide their selfish desires for prestigious status through zoning and other policy instruments that supposedly decrease traffic congestion and environmental stress, when, in fact, the policies are actually intended to prevent lower class citizens from entering the suburban limits. This deception did manage to seep into the public's eye when certain New Jersey suburban residents caused such an uproar against the construction of low and moderate income apartments in their communities that the landmark Mount Laurel II Supreme Court decision finally had to order the communities to provide such shelter (Maloney 60). Residents resisted until the Supreme Court became involved, undoubtedly revealing that the suburbs serve only as a pleasant setting to disguise their city-equivalent level of immorality in order to maintain a distinguished socioeconomic status.

Besides including the supportive family environment, which is settled far from any of the wickedness of the city, the facade surrounding American suburbs illustrates another manufactured myth: the friendly, harmonious neighborhood. Simply from its spatial layout and design, suburbia conveys a sense of invitation and comfort to all who enters its realms. With connecting yard space between households as well as distinct boundaries limiting their community size, the suburbs externally provide seclusion as if they were their own corners of the world. In addition to spatial design, suburban television sitcoms have also aided in producing this false image. Whether it was crazy Eddie on "Leave it to Beaver" or wise Wilson on "Home Improvement," friendly neighbors had a regular appearance on these television shows. Thus, it is not surprising that the word suburb became synonymous with friendly neighborhood, and reality did not prove otherwise. Sadly, even though the external display and television shows would never reveal such disaster, today's suburban residents are not as "neighborly" as one would assume.

By closely examining some of the minor changes in the appearance and design of suburban homes, one would discover that the present residents are lacking in social interaction. First of all, in a researched study, it was noted that nearly all of suburban backyards are fenced, where as ten years ago, fencing was a rarity (Lemann 39). Though only a trivial alteration, this fact conveys a distinct increase in suburban residents' desire for privacy and social seclusion. Further alterations inside the homes reveal even more convincing evidence. According to the same study, the living rooms and dining rooms are dramatically smaller than previous suburban homes, which is largely due to the fact that Americans are not entertaining guests as they previously did (37). In addition, architect Phillip Bess reveals in his article, "Democracy's Private Places" that today's suburban homes are designed with a bathroom for each resident as well as master bedroom suites, which demonstrates how we have come to "materialize in our built environment our culture's turn from the civic to the private" (17). Despite this genuine lack of community, suburb manufacturers and suburban residents are striving to uphold the suburbia's traditional "community" image. How would society react if they realized that such cozy communities were actually no different than the cold, lifeless, and cruel environments of city apartment complexes? As Christopher Leinberger states in his article "The Market and Metropolitanism," "People want to walk out of their back door and have privacy, yet walk out of their front doors and sense community" (36).

Of course, some might feel that this concept of American suburban residents' debasement is much too cynical. They might argue that there truly are Americans who live in suburbia with a morally sound and traditional family and who are more concerned with the advantages of this area over the corrupt city environment than with establishing a high socioeconomic status. Furthermore, these people may argue that actual "friendly neighborhoods" do exist in the sphere of suburbs. To be entirely honest, it would be a surprise if these types of suburban residents were not part of reality. Unfortunately, while there are always exceptions, the majority determines the rule. If the suburbs actually consisted of traditional families with stern moral standards, why would 37% of all lone mothers and non?family households choose to reside in suburbs (England 28) and why would a sociological study of teenagers detect a relationship between the emptiness within suburban families and acts of teenage alienation such as suicide? (Gaines 52). Moreover, if a suburb's main purpose was to accommodate those who wished to avoid the crude city life and not those who desired a prestigious socioeconomic label, why would several suburbs be forming therapy-type counseling for non?working mothers who feel dangerously inferior and threatened by their fellow working mothers? (Lemann 38). Finally, if people looked for suburbs as neighborly habitats and were not truly socially lacking, why would a recent study report that the majority of neighbor interaction occurs initially and entirely through children's sports activities? (Lemann 40). Sadly, it appears that the practically utopian image of the suburbs is only sustained to hide the repulsive qualities of our country's citizens.

What was once the symbol of all that was virtuous and inspiring for today's society, American suburbia has now become a representation of all of its flaws. Not only does suburbia hold the human characteristics of low morals, ruthless ambition for status, and inability for decent human interaction, but it also allows (and practically encourages) an even uglier truth, the characteristic of deception in exchange for an accepting and approving lifestyle by society. Nevertheless, as long as the people continue to be deceptive, the suburb manufacturers will proceed to create such entirely fake living environments. Therefore, when the Census Bureau continues to report that suburbia is America's most popular choice of residency, it is actually reporting the steady downfall of American decency as well as the artificiality of the American Dream.

Bess, Phillip. "Democracy's Private Places: Changes in Domestic Architecture Reflect Social Changes." First Things: A Monthly Journal of Religion and Public Life 76 (Oct 1997): 16-19.

England, Kim V.L. "Changing Suburbs, Changing women: Geographic Perspectives on Suburban Women." Frontiers 14.1 (Fall 1993): 24-44.

Gaines, Donna. Teenage Wastleland: Suburbia's Dead End Kids. Chicago: U of Chicago P, 1998.

Gillespie, Nick. "Horizontal Cities: Sensing a Shift to a More Positive Opinion about Suburbs)". Reason 32.3 (July 2000): 4-8.

Leinberger, Christopher. "The Market and Metropolitanism" Brookings Review 16.4 (Fall 1998): 35-36.

Lermann, Nicholas. "Stressed Out in Suburbia: a Generation after the Postwar Boom, Life in the Suburbs Has Changed, Even If Our Picture of It Hasn't." The Atlantic 264.5. (Nov 1989): 34-41.

Maloney, Lawrence D. "America's Suburbs Still Alive and Doing Fine." U.S. News & World Report 96.59 (March 12, 1984): 59-63.

Rosenthal, Mitchell S. "Heroin Hits Hardest in Suburbs." Alcoholism & Drug Abuse Weekly 12.23 (June 5, 2000): 5-6.

Tuan, Yi-Fi. Topophilia: A Study ofEnvironmental Perception, Attitudes and Values. Englewood Cliff, N.J.: Prentice Hall, 1974.

Tueth, Michael V. "Fun City: TV's Urban Situation Comedies of the 1990s." Journal of Popular Film and Television 28.3 (Fall 2000): 98-109.