cultural differences: March 2003 Archives

After writing on social spaces, it feels a bit like I'm catching up on a large body of previous work, not surprisingly I guess. iWire indirectly pointed me to Putnam's thesis, Bowling Alone which I should have picked up a few days ago. I guess that I'm also slightly reiterating some of the arguments from No Logo, particularly the No Space chapter.

There is a connection to social software projects, like UpMyStreet etc, but my focus at the minute is really the cultural differences, rather than how to recreate these environments online. Where this might overlap a bit is the small but sure rise of wifi enabled cafes and pubs, especially if they realise that wifi should be free rather than £5 a session.

Still not the same as what I want, entry level is too high and it is slightly artificial, but if the local estabalishment provides useful community information resources then it might be interesting, see the MeshAP wireless pub. Imagine this as a local community resource, rather than a geek haven, accessible via the phone in your pocket for free.

Using Google to research the third place, see earlier article, I found this essay by Chris Mooney. It discusses shops where you feel good shopping there and then extends into an analysis of the "third place" ideas, noting their claims for the "good-old-days". Sort of harking back to Cheers, where everyone knows your name.

Everyone has these good shopping experiences from their life, we recently discovered a new local hardware store, where all the staff actually know what they are talking about, and when stuff is due, or are able to ask someone for you. A world away from the experience you get at B&Q. So they still exist even if I'm not going to hang out in my local hardware store all day. Good friendly non-anonymous service is I suppose the basis of this sense. Also ownership of problems is an important aspect of these kinds of places, they do care about you and will call you back etc.

A couple of books, the first is the Ray Oldenburg original book, now in its third edition, The Great Good Place: Cafes, Coffee.... The second is a more recent book with a series of essays showing that the third place can be other than a cafe, Celebrating the Third Place.

We used to live in villages, now we live in cities, yet this change has happened over a relatively short period of time. We lack sufficient social spaces to interact with the people we live near. Dan and I discussed this a bit earlier and he reminded me of the third place ideas of the early 90s. I suppose French cafes act as that third place, whereas our pubs don't quite manage it in the main. They are too keen on you having a drink on your table, and coffee shops don't really encourage lingering.

Bits of London work, though they tend to be well established and affluent, like Kensington, but even delis have a hard time surviving there, serveral have closed in recent years. Soho does seem to work mind you, but it is not cheap to live in. Another good example of a community that seems to function is Noe Valley, in San Francisco. Nice local shops and restaurants all in walking distance. Good sense of community feeling and some excellent sushi.

Though as an aside, maybe money protects these neighbourhoods, just like the green belt protects England's small villages. Limited development keeps the prices high, by recommending in-fill and redevelopment only. Admittedly the green spaces do need protecting, but sometimes the people advocating the "green space" are really doing it to ensure the stability of their house price.

Guardian piece on sustainable communities, espousing some of what I've been saying. Communities are not about the buildings, they are about social spaces.

In the UK, we don't really have a word for this kind of place, we default to postcode to clarify. In Spain they have "barrio", in Paris, they have "quartier". We just don't have a word other than village.

A few weeks ago I wrote about the difference between French and UK markets. François from Padawan commented that even Parisian life has a focus around the local market, due to the quality, he then commented on the absence of something like the English pub.

This set me thinking, perhaps it is the pub and its associated 1914 licensing laws that have had an impact on British life. Here is an interesting analysis in Hansard from 1997. Perhaps the licensing of pubs early last century meant that the social fabric of the UK was fragmented in a way that is not true in France or Italy.

In France the cafe-bar is a central feature of daily life, it is the place to get a coffee, buy some cigarettes or a newspaper. Later in the day it becomes somewhere to get lunch or a quick drink, then in the evening it becomes a bar. It can also act as a social forum for other organizations, like football teams, betting, restaurant etc. For the British pub there are many fewer opportunities to fill this complete role. Many try with early opening and coffee or food for sale, but the culture for the pub is a place for drinking with food sometimes available. This focus on alcohol leads to the renowned British drinking culture, racing to the 11pm kickout, rather than the more relaxed Spanish or French evening out, that often lasts longer into the night.

This focus on the sale of alcohol has meant the creation of other venues for the sale of other products, like the corner shop and the news agent. People are less likely to frequent the pub during the daytime, so there is less passing trade for other shops, as there is not one central venue to discuss the market or have a coffee. There are cafes and other shops, but they tend to serve a single function, so don't act as a focus, despite the post office's advertising.

Some British pubs are changing towards this model, though this is partly in reaction to the influx of chain coffee bars. These chain coffee stores are just not widespread in French society. Again the venue is a single function shop, Starbucks is not going to become the social focus for a neighbourhood. The coffee bar is a good example of another trend, the widespread franchise, in France cafes and many shops are locally owned and often sell locally produced produce, in the UK we have countless branded stores, every High Street has the same shops, with the odd independent pub and the restaurants providing light relief. Some uniformity is helpful, but the single function commented on above makes them very open for franchising. These franchises hinder the development of the social places noted above, they offer a uniform view of the world and resist variation. So the local influences are lost or do not manage to get hold of the venue, they are not places where people dwell.

I'm not intending this to be a heavily anti-capitalist rant, far from it, I'd like to see vibrant local communities where there is more of a shared local feeling and less of a transitory place to sleep feeling. It does exist in some places in London, but not that many, maybe the scale of London is wrong, but then why does it work in Paris and other cities.

I guess the British model is to have sharp edges on what each venue can do, eg only buy a drink in a licensed cafe if you are having a main meal. Whereas the French model is looser, there is more variety within each cafe-bar. I'm sure that there are negatives with this approach too, but I feel very at home with that style of place.

I'm not a social historian and I'm sure that there are leaps of reasoning in the above, but it feels like there is something here. I also know that there are many exceptions to what I have said, but then that is always true with generalizations and I'm also sure that this analysis is not completely novel. However I'd appreciate your comments.

Saturday market in St Omer is a busy and fun place, the range and variety of size in produce is so unlike a UK supermarket or even many english markets. All sorts of things are for sale: flowers; vegetables; clothes; hot food. Largely home made or home grown produce eg eggs, jam, cheese, vegatables, pastries and cider. Plus of course the lovely rotisserie chicken carts. And lots of conversation.
People also seem to value the market and there seems less of the omnipresent chain stores, MacDonalds being one of the few to strongly make its presence felt. The cafes and bars all feel independent, the markets sell local produce and are large and bustling. French cars, wine, food and beer are dominant, though there is a Chinese restaurant in St Omer, maybe it could be stifling, but it feels refreshing. In the market people taste and bargain, buy their veg and meat for the week, get lunch and flowers. Lots of clothing for sale too, maybe half the market is devoted to clothes, jewelery or similar. In England there seems to be nothing that is quite the same, the typical market doesn't sell the local produce, the farmer's market is local or deli produce and feels more up market, with less of a populist feel. St Omer market feels like a central part of the town, in the UK we have let the supermarket chains dominant to the exclusion of the local market, the butcher and the bakers.
Near where I live in East Dulwich there used to be 8 local butchers, now there are none and the sainsbury's staff can sell the meat, but often know nothing about it. How has this town in France along with countless others kept its cafes, its butchers and bakers, even with the huge hypermarkets on the outskirts of the town. I know that London is not representative, but this is true across much of the UK.
One bright note I read in The Guardian last week was the resurgence of local cinemas is starting to restore the street life of small towns in the UK.

All of this prompts some questions - is it the nature of the french to be concerned with their local area ? the english have a predominantly national press, in france and america the local papers have a stronger representation.