The Pace of Life in the Golden Era...vs. today

[JazzBaby]

It's in France!

If you think the 1940s would have been a great time to live in, watch a program called The 1940s House the next time it's on PBS. Lots of housecleaning, bomb shelter building, broken-stove fixing, meal-making out of little food, etc. The family who participated in the program said it was a good experience, but seemed to appreciate their modern amenities more for it.

Good idea! I've often thought of giving up certain things (T.V., laptop, microwave etc.) for a period of time just to make me appreciate all the convienences we have a little more, and to try a little harder to entertain myself rather than just putting on a DVD.

 

[Lady Day]

I can't understand why morons want to go back to public transportation buses and trains and add all that extra time when it can be spent on something more productive or enjoyable.

Im not a moron. Perhaps your wordage or knowledge of the subject needs to be adjusted.

Public transport required preparation and a consistent schedule, like it does now. Depending on where you live, it is faster/ more efficient/ less expensive than traveling in a car. That "I need to go now now now" attitude that so many people have without a bit of planing is one reason for so much congestion and the uprooting of public transit in so many cities.

Once you had that routine, you would plan around it. I dont see how that is much different from now. A bit of organization by the masses as opposed to the integer seems to add to the pace of a lot of modern life.

LD

 

[Paisley]

I take the bus to work. Anytime I feel like running an errand, I think, "Do I really want to go to the garage, open the door, pull out, close the door, freeze/bake while the climate control adjusts, then put the car back?" In most cases, I decide it can wait until a regular errand day. Laziness can be a good thing.

Edited to add: as for the time, I sometimes read or nap on the bus.

I know public transportation doesn't work for everyone, however.

 

[ShooShooBaby]

I can't understand why morons want to go back to public transportation buses and trains and add all that extra time when it can be spent on something more productive or enjoyable. "oh it's so quaint to ride a ferry" yeah right, they'll take my air conditioned, V-8 car from my cold dead hands!!!

i ride my bike and take the bus/train exclusively. 95% of the time this works out great, and when it doesn't, i suck it up and get over it. it's great to get my daily exercise during my commute (about 8-9 miles r/t), and when i'm on the bus i can read or knit.

i'm not a moron and neither are millions of other people who use public transportation or ride bikes. some of us do it for convenience, some of us do it to save money, some of us do it to stay in shape, and some of us do it because we recognize that the use of the private car is bad for the environment. some of us do it for all of these reasons.

disagree if you want, i don't really care. just think about how many more cars would be on the road if there wasn't public transportation. you could be spending even more relaxing time in your air-conditioned v-8! [huh]

 

[LizzieMaine]

At $3 going on $4 a gallon and up, the question of commutes in "air conditioned V-8 cars" may very well soon be moot for all but the fortunate few. And when that happens, I think the current movement away from suburbia and back to a urban/village oriented way of life, where people walk or take public transport to where they need to go will accelerate.

There's an article in the current Atlantic Monthly that builds on that theme -- noting there's already formerly-high-end suburbs that are going to weed because the people who built them can no longer afford to live there. Sometimes the past may very well be the future.

 

[Paisley]

One thing I just don't get is the popularity of working downtown and commuting from way out in the suburbs. Some people say they do it for their kids. Isn't another two hours per day spent with your kids good for them? I grew up in the suburbs and was bored to death out there--there was nothing to do.

 

[AmateisGal]

Since I grew up on a farm and had to ride the bus to school (10 miles away), the concept of public transportation is a bit foreign to me. Our town had only 1600 people and people naturally drove everywhere. Back then, though, we didn't take multiple trips to town - my mom would take a day to run all the errands and wouldn't just pop in the car to grab something at the grocery store.

Now that I live in a semi-city (250,000) I am a little leery of public transportation and still drive everywhere. Maybe that's just a habit I need to change. [huh] Unfortunately, our downtown area is also where the main campus is of the university, so it's mostly comprised of a lot of bars and clubs, restaurants and financial businesses. You can't find a grocery store downtown.

Our town is also having a struggle with the core of the city- it has been taken over by illegal drugs, prostitution, and crime. It's the classic case of the wrong "element" moving into the neighborhood, so other people move further and further on the outskirts of town. That's where all the new, nice neighborhoods are. Meahwhile, the historic center of the city is rotting away.

 

[Joie DeVive]

I have mixed feelings on the subject. I would never want to give up the conveniences of today for the past. I'll keep my inoculations, antibiotics, and more efficient appliances. The past was full of back-breaking work for both men and ladies, and there weren't many who went and spent a day on the golf course.

On the other hand, people today seem to be in such a rush. My Grandmother describes Sundays as actual days of rest. After church in the summer, she and my Grandfather loved to load up the kids up in the car and picnic in the open spaces. Who does that on a regular basis anymore? Who "has the time"?? She actually frowns at me if I do my grocery shopping on Sunday..
I know many women who "don't have the time" to cook. They pickup take-out or buy pre-made heat-up dinners from some of these new places that sell those. I'm not looking down on this, but how is it that our Mothers and Grandmothers had the time to cook and we do not? Is it the commuting? That more ladies are working? Perhaps it's not so much that we have more to do, perhaps it is that we choose to do different things with our time.

The one place that I really see a change in the pace of life, is for middle class children. Teaching, I saw so many children whose pace of life would wear me out. Many children are "over-programed" today. It isn't unusual to see children with at least one extracurricular activity a day on top of homework and other normal parts of life. In the time period of which we are speaking, as I understand it, this was not typical. My Dad was in a lower socio-economic group, but once his homework was done, he was roaming the fields and creeks of his small town until supper. My mother was closer to the middle class, and had chores on the farm as well as being a Jobs Daughter, but still had quite a bit of free play time. Children need unstructured play time, and I don't think many are getting as much as they should. I personally recommend the book: Last Child In the Woods on the subject.
Of course, there was a big change in attitudes about childhood around the turn of the century. Before that, many children in the lower class (which made up a great percentage of the population) were working, but that is largely before the era we are discussing.

I guess we are always seeking more leisure. I think it was a 1930's union slogan that said: "8 hours work, 8 hours sleep, 8 hours play"!! Sounds good to me, but where do those household chores fall?? lol

 

[CharlesB]

Since I grew up on a farm and had to ride the bus to school (10 miles away), the concept of public transportation is a bit foreign to me. Our town had only 1600 people and people naturally drove everywhere. Back then, though, we didn't take multiple trips to town - my mom would take a day to run all the errands and wouldn't just pop in the car to grab something at the grocery store.

Now that I live in a semi-city (250,000) I am a little leery of public transportation and still drive everywhere. Maybe that's just a habit I need to change. [huh] Unfortunately, our downtown area is also where the main campus is of the university, so it's mostly comprised of a lot of bars and clubs, restaurants and financial businesses. You can't find a grocery store downtown.

Our town is also having a struggle with the core of the city- it has been taken over by illegal drugs, prostitution, and crime. It's the classic case of the wrong "element" moving into the neighborhood, so other people move further and further on the outskirts of town. That's where all the new, nice neighborhoods are. Meahwhile, the historic center of the city is rotting away.

Heyyyyyyyyyyyyyy you leave the drugs and hookers outta this!:rage: That being said I know exactly how you feel. My town's high street is perpetually over run by drunken college kids and it seems like all the pubs cater to them. Ive learned to just go to walk to the other end of town ad go to the old man pub thats down this one alley

 

[Lincsong]

A car equals freedom and independence. I can go where I want, when I want and for how long I want. I don't want to be dependent on some public transit for my needs nor do I wish to be at the mercy of a bus schedule. Public Transit doesn't help the enviroment because the buses are more polluting that cars. In addition a car cuts down on commutes. I don't know of many buses that can get me somewhere faster than me driving. I do my own schedule. If there were less public transit the better since most are unprofitable and dependent on tax subsidies and they only get in the way of someone in a car who has to get somewhere.

 

[Weston]

A car equals freedom and independence. I can go where I want, when I want and for how long I want. I don't want to be dependent on some public transit for my needs nor do I wish to be at the mercy of a bus schedule. Public Transit doesn't help the enviroment because the buses are more polluting that cars. In addition a car cuts down on commutes. I don't know of many buses that can get me somewhere faster than me driving. I do my own schedule. If there were less public transit the better since most are unprofitable and dependent on tax subsidies and they only get in the way of someone in a car who has to get somewhere.

This is largely because our public transit companies are incompetent and or inefficient. Take a look at Japan's rail systems and subways to see a very efficient mass transit system. Unfortunately, we don't care enough to do it right. Half-measures are the curse of everything it seems.

 

[surely]

Linksong, I was wondering: do you owe the pro public transportation lobby an apology? Certainly you have a right to your opinion & to express it, but you do not have a right to be gratuitously rude. IMHO

 

[warbird]

This is largely because our public transit companies are incompetent and or inefficient. Take a look at Japan's rail systems and subways to see a very efficient mass transit system. Unfortunately, we don't care enough to do it right. Half-measures are the curse of everything it seems.

The comparison of Japan or even many European nations to the US is simply poor logic. There are numerous cities in this country with excellent public transit systems, but it is not, absolutely not a realistic answer for most Americans. Most of this country is spread out with miles and miles between most necessities and for the most part that is the way we like it.

I think Lincsong's reaction comes from a mentality form many city dwellers I have met in my travels who think everyone should have to travel by public transportation. In their insular city life world that's the way they do it, why can't we all. It reminds me of spending time a number of years ago in New England where I heard numerous times how we southerners should give up our AC in cars because we pollute the environment. I told them I'd give it up when they give up their heating oil. Oh no we need that you see. And yet we don't need AC. Obviously people who have never been in the south in the summer time. They said well what did people do before AC. Well, they died.

 

[warbird]

I don't think life sixty or seventy years ago was at all slower -- the average working-class family of that time was just as busy as people today: the six day work week was still common even for white-collar people in the 1930s, housework tended to be backbreaking for anyone who couldn't afford to hire help, and it was expected that when kids reached working age they'd take some kind of part time job to help out the family finances. All those things put strong demands on time, and when the war came along, those demands became even stronger. Even if you weren't in the military, you were expected to do your bit in other ways -- Red Cross work, volunteering as a civil defense warden or an AWS spotter, working on neighborhood scrap drives, all that sort of thing took time and effort. The idea that Golden Era folks tended to sit around on porch swings on warm summer nights sipping lemonade and listening to the gentle chirp of crickets in the flower garden is a bit of revisionist nostalgia.

Very well said.

 

[Lady Day]

I think Lincsong's reaction comes from a mentality form many city dwellers I have met in my travels who think everyone should have to travel by public transportation. In their insular city life world that's the way they do it, why can't we all.

I dont think anyone replying to this thread made any remote inclination to this at all. But I digress. We are getting off topic and should not make this thread a public transit debate.

Lets talk about Pace of Life.

LD

 

[jayem]

A car equals freedom and independence. I can go where I want, when I want and for how long I want. I don't want to be dependent on some public transit for my needs nor do I wish to be at the mercy of a bus schedule. Public Transit doesn't help the enviroment because the buses are more polluting that cars. In addition a car cuts down on commutes. I don't know of many buses that can get me somewhere faster than me driving. I do my own schedule. If there were less public transit the better since most are unprofitable and dependent on tax subsidies and they only get in the way of someone in a car who has to get somewhere.

Lincsong, where do you live? Here in Chicago, we rarely have any of those inconvenient problems. If you find that you're not arriving on time to your destinations, maybe take an earlier bus/train/el? They should all come about every 15mins, anyways (with the exception of trains, which is every hour and NEVER late unless something major). I personally HATE driving in the city. You're sitting in traffic for loads of time, which actually burns more gas than taking a bus and making a few quick stops before your destination. In fact, sometimes public transportation cuts back on time. When I went to high school, I took a train. It took my 10 minutes to get from the station, to the station in the part of the city my school was it. When I got my car, I drove a few times. It took 45 minutes due to traffic, parking, speed limits... I could see if maybe living in a rural area, a car would be more convenient... but when you live in a major city, it's just not too practical. Not to mention, paying for parking spaces if and when you can find one.

 

[Twitch]

Lizzie mentions the trend to move closer to the city again but out here and in most medium-large metropolitan areas these so-called reclaimed inner city properties are horrendously expensive relative to anything. They have bachelor pad size condos/apartment/lofts/dwellings that are tiny yet more expensive than larger accomadations farther away.

The fact that these refurbished downtown areas are still sleazy with vagrants, beggars, transients and criminals is no big draw. You are still better off to use the $$ to drive in from somewhere else.

Public transportation is only good in the northeast where the area was conceived and laid out with it in mind from the beginning as an integral part.

I grew up in St. Louis which had decent bus transprtation. They ran north-south, east-west. If you needed to go somewhere to the northwest, let's say, you paid for a ticket and traveled north to a point where it made sense to begin going west to your destination. The driver gave a you a transfer ticket and you could board the next westbound bus to your destination.

In So. California you have to carry a bag full of bus route maps because instead of a bus traveling in one direction to an end place and reversing they go all over hell as if they're trying to cherry pick riders from as many streets as possible like some sort of perverted car pool. The routes turn every which way even reversing for some distances at times.

The complaint is usually that city's downtown areas are the places of the most congestion, lack of parking/high parking rates. Everubody does not trek in the center of the city every day. There are people going all directions al lthe time and it is impssible to serve a opulation like that with any form of public transportation.

And let's face it. None of these systems, except perhaps in the well extablished northeast, make money. They basically operate at a loss and bonds, taxes and such fund them. They can't stand on their own. You don't see private corporations attempting to make profits in urban transportation. If it were profitable there would be competition for the business.

The USA is not like Europe with it's quaint little 15' wide streets built with the surrounding buildings 400 years ago when goat carts were the hot transportation item. The vastness in square miles makes this country unique. Europe's munchkin size infrastructures made it paramount that they have some sort of public transit, like our northeast.

And in the northeast people do not have to wait extended periods for the next vehicles of public transport. They have it good. They even have multiple forms of public transit to get to the same location. They would be indignant if they had to wait an hour for a bus but in most regions with thinner systems that is the norm. But if the big cities in the northeast had to begin today to obtain rights of way, plan routes, and construct any new anything in 2008 dollars they'd be broke in a New York minute! The only reason what they got works is because it has been in existance for over 100 years.

In most cities of the US there is no way to commute except by car. We have many cities that are in more semi-rural geography where it is not solid city corridors for 100 miles. Most cities dramatically change from city to country and there is simply no way to accomodate dozens of surrounding small burgs with transportation. Besides how and why would city transit vehicles operate outside the city?

In many smaller and medium cities there does not exist a large enough tax base to fund transit. Places of 50-250,000 habitants have perpetually poor or nonexistant public transit. Even when they do the systems are so fragile that riders have long waits for vehicles or the system simply does not travel where they need to go. There are a lot of folks that would have to drive in many miles in order to get on a public bus. If you've driven in 20 miles to the city limits what's the sense of riding a bus 3-5 miles farther?

To not own a vehicle in these small-medium areas would render inhabitants at a disadvantage due to the fact that it is pointless to attempt to travel to a grocery store, buy only enough that you can carry and return home on a bus. Then repeat as necessary!

The bottom line is that the US have vastly different requirements depending on its geographic population's needs. There is no one formula that can work everywhere.

 

[Paisley]

Here's a thread on public transportation.

 

[warbird]

I dont think anyone replying to this thread made any remote inclination to this at all. But I digress. We are getting off topic and should not make this thread a public transit debate.

Lets talk about Pace of Life.

LD

I never said anyone here said such a thing. I think I clearly stated that is a mentality I have seen in cities..... And I said perhaps that is what Lincsong was responding to as well.

I used public transportation when I lived near DC. The metro was far easier to use than a car and I found it relaxing not to have to fuss with the traffic. I could read or close my eyes and relax if I so chose.

As lizzie said, so many things had to be done by hand and made from scratch back then that life was certainly not full of relaxation time. The pace may have been slower for some, but steady none the less. There are things I like about that time many years ago, but I don't know if I would work well in that time having lived in this one.

Overall we are more productive now. But that doesn't necessarily make it better. The more productive the more pressure to do more. There's more time for play now, but we seem to use it less for family and I think it has hurt us. And at least in this country vacation time often goes unused or it ends up being a working vacation with the ease of which your work can contact you.

I think people never knew anything other than hard work. They expected it and few could be considered lazy. Today many are lazy and say they never have any tie at all when they spend their weekends sitting in front of a box watching a football game. We all have to set our own priorities, but to me most of the time that is a complete waste of time. But hey that's just me.

 

[dhermann1]

Let's focus on the issue of PACE. That's a very subjective term. It implies feeling pressed for time, always having to hurry and rush. One factor that causes this is the slowness of overcrowded modes of transportation, and the greater distances we try to cover in our daily lives. It's great to drive if the roads aren't jammed, but bumper to bumper commutes are among the most stressful experiences in modern life. Living in New York, I appreciate the subway system greatly, but the "rush" hour is when the trains move slowest. It's really miserable being jammed in a subway car, hanging form a bar at a slightly tilted angle, while your left knee goes slowly numb (this happens to me after about 20 minutes of jammed up standing). But it still makes it unnecessary for me to own a car, and that's a great convenience, as well as a monetary saving. It's a trade off. Back in the days of trolleys and interurbans, transportation was a little slower, but in many ways much easier. Every small town across the country had a system, and they went EVERYWHERE. As I've stated before, you could go from Maine to Kansas City straight through on the trolley. If you don't remember the street car system, you can't appreciate what it was. The destruction of America's trolleys was a true catastrophe.
As far as actual hours, it's a fact that Americans work something like 15% more hours than they did a couple of generations ago, and now families need two full time wage earners, rather than the one that used to be common. That makes life for working mothers hell on wheels. I don't care how many labor saving devices they lacked 75 years ago, stay at home moms in the "Golden Era" did not have that kind time pressure.
Kids got out of school at 3 PM, and they were on their own! It was normal! They walked home, ditched their books, and went out and played till suppertime. Believe me, kids get a lot more out of that than any kind of organized activity.
The result of the lack of time is the feeling that your life just isn't your own. My memories go back to the early 50's, and in my view the pace of life is definitely faster and more stressful.
BTW, while I think Lincsong has a perfectly legitimate point of view, I think calling people morons for having a different point of view is just not appropriate for this forum.