Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Urbanism, Urbanization and Acculturation
Urbanism, Urbanization and Acculturation
URBANISM,
URBANIZATION
AND ACCULTURATION*
By RALPHL. BEALS
where common efforts can sharpen our conceptual tools. The problems specifi-
cally I wish to discuss are those related to urbanism, urbanization and accul-
turation-a segment of the total field of culture change. Even this field has
not been entirely ignored either by sociologists or by anthropologists, but such
discussion as has taken place has failed in my opinion, totally to explore the
problem.
Sociologists on the whole have been fairly perceptive of the significance
of urban phenomena as creating a new type of society. As Louis Wirth, per-
haps one of the most acute commentators in this field has said, “The anoma-
lous situation symbolic of urban life consists in the presence of close physical
proximity coupled with vast social distances of men. This has profoundly
altered the basis of human association and has subjected the traits of human
nature as molded by simpler social organizations to severe train."^ I n this
quotation, and still more in his “Urbanism as a Way of Life,” Wirth points
out the problem of modification of human behavior imposed by the urban
way of life. This problem is what I propose to consider under the term of
urbanization, restricting its meaning perhaps more than is usually done by
sociologists. But while recognizing the problem of urbanization, my admittedly
somewhat illiterate view of sociologists’ preoccupations suggests that they
have paid much more attention to urbanism than they have to urbanization.
In other words, I feel the primary sociological concern has been with the nature
of the urban society rather than with the processes of urbanism or the adapta-
tion of men to urban life.
On the anthropological side, this problem has been far from totally
neglected. Much of the theoretical framework of Redfield’s work has been pro-
jected against the problem of urbanism. I n Redfield’s case, however, the pri-
mary concern has been with the way in which the influence of urbanism is
extended into the urban hinterland and particularly into the folk culture.
Redfield likewise has clearly conceived of his work as bearing on the problem
of acculturation.
Extending beyond Redfield’s work in one direction are the numerous an-
thropological studies of acculturation which in rare instances reach the polar
situation where the contact of two primitive groups results in acculturative
processes. A theoretical opposite pole would consist of the village group devel-
oping, with solely its own population increase, into an urban community with
all its concomitant changes in structure and the modifications of human
association and human character suggested by Wirth. Between these poles
lie a variety of intermediate situations which I will suggest in subsequent para-
graphs and which in many cases have yet to be adequately studied.
Interest in this problem on m y own part first arose through participation
in a joint department of anthropology and sociology. With other members
of the department I became concerned with discovering frameworks within
8 Wirth, 1940,p. 752.
6 AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGIST [53, 1951
modified by Euro-American contact, still are parts of the same genus culture
but in any case this is a matter for investigation rather than assertion. I n the
light of these considerations our provisional hypothesis is that rural-urban
acculturation and cross-cultural acculturation differ only in degree and do not
represent substantially different processes of change.
Somewhat more serious is the fact that in most acculturation studies, such
as those of Redfield, we are dealing with changes occurring in an existing and
continuing social group whereas the migrant into the urban area comes as an
individual uprooted from his original social group and cultural context. Yet
even in the continuing social group, acculturation processes are in part to be
illuminated by individual behavior under the impact of an alien culture.
Moreover, in the urban area, immigrants often segregate or are segregated to
form new groups of common although perhaps less integrated characteristics.
The great body of Mexican immigrants tend to live in enclave communities
in which culture change occurs a t least in part as a group process. This group
formation is enhanced by a degree of enforced residential segregation which is
even more highly operative in the case of the rural Negro immigrant. Finally,
the Iowa or Kansas farmer likewise tends to associate in some measure with
his own kind, a tendency illustrated in the Los Angeles area in the past through
the operation of state clubs with their social and often political functions. I t
is a fairly well established dictum of urban studies that people tend to settle
among their own kind. For the Los Angeles area this is dramatically shown
in an unpublished study by Eshrev Shevky comparing the Westchester dis-
trict in 1940 arid 1946. Although the district population increased from 350
in 1940 to 14,350 in 1946, virtually the same age structure and family and
occupational status prevailed in both years. Because of these phenomena of
group formation we are operating on the working hypothesis that the culture
change process will be different only quantitatively and that the fundamental
processes will be comparable.
Many other facets of the problems of urbanism, urbanization and accul-
turation have not been considered in detail by our group yet afford equally
significant areas of common exploration. For example, one of the very signifi-
cant aspects of urbanism in the United States is the influence of the city
upon rural areas and rural life. I n varying degree, the countryside is being
urbanized, a process that in some areas, such as California, has proceeded so
far and so rapidly that true rural life in the traditional sense has almost dis-
appeared. Thus, according to the definitions of a farm worked out by the farm
mortgage departments of the major life insurance companies, I am told there
are, to all practical intent, no farms in California.
This process of urbanization of the country likewise has obvious bearing
on the general theory of acculturation. It likewise has wide bearings of practi-
cal significance in a time when it is proposed to accelerate the spread of indus-
trialism and rising living standards throughout the world. We have reason
8 AMERICAN ANTEROPOLOGIST [53, 1951
or that the drop, if it exists, is similar for all classes? I n Rio de Janeiro, for
example, statistics would probably suggest a drop in net reproduction rates
not dissimilar to that for North America. Yet there is some indication that the
drop is not due to a radical change in family size but to the fact that a large
part of the industrial labor force consists of unmarried males who do not form
families. Possibly the size of such families as are formed, or the size of families
on the upper economic levels does not show such a drop. Similarly, do birth
rates, net reproduction rates, or family size show the same patterns in India
and China as they do in the United States? Some data of this sort exist but they
are far from adequate.
The reproduction rate and family size problem are of very practical as
well as theoretical importance. There are many other assumptions regarding
urbanism which need further testing in a broader framework for which imme-
diate practical considerations do not appear. Is it true, for example, that secu-
larization is an urban phenomenon in India or China? Does kinship sink into
insignificance in a Chinese city? Do formal controls loom as important in
other contexts as they do in the American city? The pecuniary character of
economic life and a high degree of individuation are often cited as urban char-
acteristics. All of us are familiar with non-urban societies with some degree
of pecuniary development and Goldschmidt has recently shown the existence
of a high degree of individuation for native Northwest California. Is it not
possible that these characteristics are not peculiar to the urban setting but are
to be associated with some other variables?
Industrialization is characteristic of Euro-American cities. New power
sources and the dispersal of industry suggest this is impermanent. Technologi-
cal specialization and industrialization may be characteristics primarily
associated with urbanized societies, yet not be necessary attributes of the city
itself. If this be true, it would be well to know it before Point IV or similar
programs go too far. Indeed, harking back in part to the acculturation prob-
lem, it may be well to try to discover more about the groups which may be
industrialized most easily. Such knowledge could have great significance for
the success of programs to raise living standards of underdeveloped areas.
Wilbert Moore has shown that in the Puebla region of Mexico it is the least
acculturated or urbanized groups, namely the Indians, who flock into factory
work. It is a widely held belief in Peru and Ecuador that the Indian must
first adopt rural mestizo culture before he can be urbanized or industrialized.
Yet in a t least one Ecuadorean village studied, the Indians are becoming ur-
banized without becoming rural mestizos first. Our own cities in the past cen-
tury grew more through immigration from Europe than from recruitment
from rural America. Is it, by chance, easier to induce the radical cultural
changes of industrialization or urbanization if there is a wider gulf between the
cultures rather than a narrower one?
10 AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGIST [53, 1951
The list of urban characteristics which need greater study and cross-cul-
tural checks could be greatly expanded. I have mentioned neither politics
nor associations. Enough has been said to indicate both the practical and
theoretical importance of such studies. I hope likewise that what I have said
indicates that such studies offer a wide variety of opportunities for fruitful
collaboration between anthropologists and sociologists and will enrich the
conceptual and theoretical equipment of both groups.
Talcott Parsons recently suggested that although it is impossible a t present
to develop a systematic general theory of sociology, let alone the social sci-
ences, we are in a position to discern certain islands of fairly well established
theory, both on the general level and on the level of what he calls “middle”
theory where research hypotheses are generated. He urges the desirability of
charting out the various islands of theory and seeking the channels and dis-
stances between them. Only thus will we begin to establish a continent. The
discussion presented is offered in the belief that it suggests a substantial
island of “middle” theory. If it can be adequately charted and its position
established, i t should be fruitful of research hypotheses.
There are those among my colleagues who object to efforts to unify theory
and who cling to the traditional and rigid disciplinary lines. It is my own firm
belief that anthropology has a body of phenomena for study and a distinctive
mode of approach which will preserve our discipline for a long time to come,
but I equally firmly believe we can strengthen rather than weaken ourselves
by expanding our search for unified bodies of theory. The development of
unified theories in the natural sciences has almost obliterated the boundaries
between physics and chemistry. Yet the cores of the two disciplines remain
clearly distinguishable and both subjects have undergone spectacular advances
through their cross fertilization. Despite the dangers of analogy, the results of
our relations with psychology suggest that a widening of our search for com-
mon ground with the other social sciences may prove equally fruitful to an-
thropology.
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA
Los A N G E ~ E SCALIFORNIA
,
BIBLIOGRAPHY
KLUCKHOHN, CLYDE,1949, Mirror for Man, New York.
KROEBER, A. L., 1936, “The So-called Social Sciences,” Journal of Socid Philosophy, Vol. I, No. 4,
July *
WIRTH, LOUIS,1940, “The Urban Society and Civilization,” American Journal of Sociology,
XLV, No. 5, March.