THE BIRTH OF SUBURBIA

A. There is no single pivotal (central and important) moment that could be

separated out from any other as the conception of the suburban lifestyle; from
the early 1800s, various types of suburban development have sprung up and
evolved in their own localised ways, from the streetcar suburbs of New York to
the dormitory towns outside of London. It is William Levitt, however, who is
generally regarded as the father of modern suburbia. During World War II,
Levitt served in the United States Navy where he developed expertise in the
mass construction of military housing, a process that he streamlined using
uniform (the same) and interchangeable parts (những thành phần có thể thay
thế lẫn nhau) . In 1947, the budding developer used this utilitarian (thực dụng)
knowledge to begin work with his father and architect brother constructing a
planned community on Long Island, New York. With an emphasis on speed,
efficiency, and cost-effective production, the Levitts were soon able to produce
over 30 units a day. => the founder of what í broadly understood as
comtemporary “suburbs”
B. William Levitt correctly predicted the demand for affordable, private, quiet, and
comfortable homes from returning after World War II and with the baby boom
starting to kick in. All the original lots sold out in a matter of days, and by
1951, nearly 18,000 homes in the area had been constructed by the Levitt fit
Sons Company. Levittown quickly became the prototype (hình mẫu) of mass-
produced housing, spurring the construction of similar projects in Pennsylvania,
New Jersey, and even Puerto Rico, followed by a new industry, and soon a new
way of life and a new ideal for the American family.
C. One of the major criticisms of suburbia is that it can lead to isolation and social
dislocation. With properties spread out over great swathes of land, sealed off
(vây lấp không cho vào nơi nào) from one another by bushes, fences and trees,
the emphasis of suburban life is placed squarely on privacy rather than
community. In the densely populated urban settlements that predated suburbs
(and that are still the predominant way of life for some people), activities such
as childcare and household chores as well as sources of emotional and moral
support were widely socialised. This insured that any one family would be able
to draw on a pool of social resources from their neighbours, building
cohabitants and family on nearby streets. Suburbia breaks these networks down
into individual and nuclear family units resulting in an increase in anti social
 behaviour even amongst the wealthy. Teens from wealthy suburban families,
for example, are more likely to smoke, drink alcohol, and use drugs than their
poorer urban peers, and are also more likely to experience depression and
anxiety.
D. Another major problem with the suburban lifestyle is its damaging ecological
impact. The comparison of leafy, quiet, and low-density suburbs with life in the
concrete towers of sooty, congested urban conurbations (khu đô thị) is actually
quite misleading; as it turns out, if you want to be kind to the natural
environment, the key is to stay away from it. Suburbia fails the environmental
friendliness test on a number of counts. Firstly, due to their low population
density, suburbs consume natural land at a much higher rate than high-density
row housing or apartment buildings. Secondly, they encourage the use of
personal motor vehicles, often at a rate of one per family member, at the
expense of public transport. It is also much less efficient to provide electricity
and water to individual suburban houses instead of individual units in an
apartment building. In his comparison of urban and suburban pollution, Edward
L. Glaeser concluded that we need to “build more sky towers – especially in
California”. Virtually everywhere, he found cities to be cleaner than suburbs.
And the difference in carbon dioxide emissions between high-density cities and
their suburbs (for example, in New York) was the highest. Urban residents of
New York can claim on average to produce nearly 15,000 pounds of carbon
dioxide less than their suburban peers.
E. Another negative aspect of suburban life is its stifling (/ˈstaɪ.fəl.ɪŋ/ ngột ngạt)
conformity and monotony of social experience. It was not just the nuts and
bolts (practical fact rather than theories or ideas) and the concrete foundations
of suburban houses that got replicated street upon street, block upon block, and
suburb upon suburb; it was everything from the shops and cultural life to
people’s hopes, dreams, and aspirations. Suburbia gave birth to the “strip
mall”, a retail establishment that is typically composed of a collection of
national or global chain stores, all stocked with a centrally dictated,
homogenous (/ˌhɒm.əˈdʒiː.ni.əs/ gồm rất nhiều thứ giống nhau) array of
products. The isolation and lack of interaction in suburbs has also encouraged
the popularity of television, a passively receptive medium for the viewer that, in
the early days at least, offered an extremely limited scope of cultural exposure
compared with the wealth of experiences available in the inner city. Meanwhile,
much of the inner-city “public sphere” has been lost with suburban flight. The
 public sphere is the area of social life in which people come together to freely
discuss and identify social problems. In the city, this has traditionally occurred
around newsstands, in coffee houses, salons, theatres, meeting halls, and so on.
Suburbia has not found a way to replace this special type of social experience,
however. Social meeting points in the suburbs tend to be based exclusively
around specific interests such as sports or cultural clubs, with no broad forms of
daily social interaction.
F. These points do not suggest the idea of suburbia itself is flawed, but that it has
not been executed in a way that takes into account the full spectrum of human
needs and desires. This likely reflects the hasty (vội vàng), thrown-together
nature of early suburban development. (đáp án: the speed of suburban growth
has contributed to its imperfections)With the baby boom rippling across
Western countries and demand for family-friendly housing skyrocketing,
developers and city planners were unable to develop sophisticated models.
Now, however, we should take time to consider what has gone wrong and how
we can reconfigure (change the structure or arrangement) the suburb. How
can we imbue suburban life with (imbue sth/s.o with sth: to fill sth or s.one
with a particular feeling, quality or idea) the lost sphere of public discussion
and debate? How can people maintain their sought after privacy without
sacrificing a sense of community? How can we use new technologies to make
suburbs environmentally friendly? These are questions for which the developers
of tomorrow will have to find answers, lest (e ngại rằng) the dream of suburbia
become the nightmare of disturbia.