The+longer+version

//Bowling Alone// by Robert D. Putnam

Trying to tie the book //Bowling Alone// to a class about the foundations of educational technology is somewhat of a stretch—but perhaps not. In fact, before I read the book completely, I felt sure author Robert D. Putnam would lash out at the Internet as the great evil causing people to “bowl alone.” And I am almost embarrassed to admit that when I discussed the book with friends and family, I would toss out the title—//Bowling Alone//—along with a (too-quick) overview of the book—the phrase “growing isolationism in the United States”—and we would have a “that blasted, isolationist-causing Internet” sort of exchange. Since it also took me quite awhile to get into a flow of reading—the book contains more than 400 small-font pages filled with tables and charts plus 100 pages of appendixes and notes—I’m afraid I biased a number of people into thinking the Internet was the great cause of our social demise.

I was wrong.

In my defense, if the book had been written in 2011, instead of the year 2000, it may very well have focused on the potential of the Internet in either creating a cure for the social ills that plague us—or have pointed its literary finger at the Internet for making America even sicker.

As it is, however, the role of the Internet—and other technologies in this day and age—remains a question. In my mind, a hopeful question.

Putnam divides his tome, //Bowling Alone//, into five sections:
 * The “Introduction”
 * “Trends in Civic Engagement and Social Capital”
 * “Why?”
 * “So what?”
 * And “What Is to Be Done?”

Seemingly short, simple, and to the point—except for the myriad of pages and facts and figures between each sectional divide. Worthy, to be sure, but not a book for the casual reader. Putnam’s //Bowling Alone// seems a calm, matter-of-fact, filled-with-evidence sort of affair, but the resulting—revealing—pages stir the soul and truly are a call to action.


 * Section I: Introduction **

In the “Introduction,“ Putnam shares a view of the withering civic and social life in American communities, evident in the last few decades of the twentieth century. He defines the term //social capital// to refer to connections among individuals—social networks and the norms of reciprocity and trustworthiness that arise from them. Social capital has both an individual and a collective aspect. Being well-connected can help you find a job, a helping hand, companionship, or even a shoulder to cry on. But social networks or civic engagement also play a part in the greater good—think “service clubs” or the PTA, Weight Watchers or Alcoholics Anonymous. Though Putnam focuses much on the withering of civic engagement throughout his book, he hints, even in this introduction, that Americans have the power to reverse the decline.


 * //As Putnam closes his Introduction he brings up bowling—in the telling of the story of John Lambert and Andy Boschma. It was only through their local bowling league that the two men knew each other. Lambert was 64, a retiree; Boschma was a 33-year-old accountant. One was African American; the other white. Lambert had been on a kidney transplant waiting list for three years when Boschma learned casually about Lambert’s need. He unexpectedly approached Lambert and offered one of his own kidneys.//**


 * //“Andy saw something in me that others didn’t,” Lambert said. “When were in the hospital, Andy said to me, ‘John, I really like you and have a lot of respect for you. I wouldn’t hesitate to do this all over again.’ I got choked up.”//**


 * //That they bowled together made all the difference—and their story is one example of ways that Americans can and should reconnect with each other. As Putnam says, “That is the simple argument of this book.”//**


 * Section II: Trends in Civic Engagement and Social Capital **

In the next section of his book, Putnam discusses the trends in civic engagement and social capital, exploring the reasons behind each downfall or upturn. For example, voter turnout in these United States has been on the decline. In 1960, nearly 63 percent of voters made the decision in the presidential election between John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon. In 1996, only 49 percent of voters participated in choosing among Bill Clinton, Bob Dole, and Ross Perot. (Since the writing of the book, however, voting did increase to 57.5 percent for the 2008 election.) However, since 1960, registering to vote has become easier and millions more within the population are eligible to vote (since the passing of the 1965 Voting Rights Act). Yet voter turnout is low.

Likewise, civic and religious participation has decreased. Americans may be more likely to receive mailings about club or service activities but are 50 percent less likely to participate than they were 30-40 years ago. Americans also go to church less often, and churches are less engaged with the wider community. Within the workplace, we make fewer connections, partly because we tend toward shorter job tenure. Even socially, Americans are losing connectedness. We play cards less often, host fewer dinner parties, rarely gather for family dinners, have more fast food rather than food at a restaurant or bar where we might have to linger, do not visit our neighbor’s porch or otherwise informally socialize. We run and get fit alone.


 * //As Putnam says, bowling remains popular—but not in leagues. We tend toward watching rather than playing sports. We do more observing and less doing.//**

In fact, the only activities that go against the “bowling alone” tide are participating in small groups, social movements, and the Internet.

Even then, the groups tend toward self-help and support rather than being civicly minded. The social movements are easy to join—just write a check.

The Internet’s impact is still unknown, though it is sure to widespread. The telephone took nearly seven decades to reach seventy-percent of the market; the Internet took seven years. It hosts virtual funerals, weddings, prayers, and marches. If social capital is about networks, then the Internet is the “network to end all networks.” It is a powerful tool for transmitting information among physically distant people. Social networks can make connections between people who share interests rather than people who simply share locale. The Internet is more egalitarian—“on the Internet, no one knows you’re a dog.” Race, age, gender, appearance do not matter. The Internet has its downside, too. The “digital divide” continues to divide those who have access and those who do not. Using the Internet provides nonverbal rather than face-to-face communication; it lacks facial expressions, postures, movements, and gestures. In allowing for connections between those with shared interests, it also increases the risk for confining our communities to people who share precisely our own interests.

Quite frankly, the Internet has the ability to be a niftier telephone (a complement to communication) or a niftier television (a social isolator). “The most important question is not what the Internet will do to us but we will do with it,” says Putnam.


 * Section III: Why? **


 * Moving from discussing the trends in social capital, Putnam then asks “why?”**

He explores the possible factors that have caused the decline in social capital in the latter part of the 20th century. These include the pressures of time and money, mobility and sprawl, technology and mass media, and changes from generation to generation. While all of those elements play a part in decreasing social capital, Putnam presents each one as a piece of the entire pie of influence, with his last two topics—television and generational issues—comprising the largest pieces of the pie.

Unlike time, money, mobility, sprawl and to which generation we belong, technology, specifically television, is absolutely under our control. Therefore, let me focus on TV’s impact on social capital.

The television, like the Internet, has permeated our culture at a rapid rate. In 1950, 10 percent of American homes had A TV. By 1959, 90 percent of homes did. Then statistics of owning a single set in a home grew to multiple sets, and per capita viewing hours grew and grew. Add the ability to watch videos and play games, and TV has become one of the largest draws to getting Americans to stay home—instead of being socially and civically engaged.

As Putnam says, “the rise of electronic communications and entertainment is one of the most powerful social trends of the twentieth century… it has rendered our leisure more private and passive. “


 * //A prime example of these trends can be found at the Holiday Bowling Lanes in New London, Connecticut. “Mounted above each lane is a giant television screen displaying the evening’s TV fare. Even on a full night of league play team members are no longer in lively conversations with one another about the day’s events, public and private. Instead each stares silently at the screen while awaiting his or her turn. Even while bowling together, they are watching alone” (p. 245)//**


 * Section IV: So What? **

After answering “Why?” Putnam asks “So what?”

He has shown us the decrease in social capital and the reasons why the decreases have occurred. What does it matter? Putnam makes the impact clear: on our children, our neighborhoods, our economic prospects, our health and happiness, and even our democracy.

In short, the higher the social capital index—the more residents trust one another, join organizations, volunteer their time, vote, and socialize—the better it is for all of us. Social capital is only second to poverty in affecting children’s lives. The higher the social capital, the less likely it is for teenagers to become parents, drop out of school, get involved in crime, or die due to suicide or homicide. Lower social capital equals higher murder rates. Higher social capital equals a higher likelihood of economic prosperity for individuals, firms, neighborhoods and even nations!

Social capital is also one of the most powerful determinants of our health and well-being. It rivals in strength to detrimental factors such as cigarette smoking, obesity, high blood pressure, and physical inactivity. In fact, communities where individuals smoked cigarettes, were fat and physically inactive, but were civicly engaged experienced great health; when their offspring became adults with those same health habits but lower social capital, they experienced the health conditions associated with those negative factors. High social capital equals health and happiness.

“As a general rule of thumb,” says Putnam. “If you belong to no groups but decide to join one, you cut your risk of dying over the next year in half. If you smoke and belong to no groups, it’s a toss-up statistically whether you should stop smoking or start joining.”


 * Section V: What Is to Be Done? **

The last three decades of the twentieth century show that a variety of social, economic, and technological changes have diminished America’s supply of social capital. Putnam asks and also answers the question, “What is to be done?” by giving us a history lesson—and some hope.

You see, at the end of the nineteenth century, our country also experienced a period of technological, economic, and social change that rendered obsolete its store of social capital. Between 1870 and 1990, America changed from a rural, localized, traditional society to a modern, industrialized, urban nation. It was not a seamless transition. The muckraking journalists of the day portrayed the tragic conditions in slum tenements, the urban squalor, the government corruption, the depredations of large companies, the abuses of immigrant laborers… The transformation of society affected everyone and tore away at traditional relationships and roles.

Those who came to the rescue—bit by bit—did so, not by yearning for the less-complicated past but by embracing the promise of technological advance and unparalleled prosperity yet seeking a return to a sense of connectedness. Social capital. They united with others to help the poor. Churches sought to be more relevant and help the disadvantaged. Municipal reforms sought urban improvements. Women’s groups talked less of literature and more about addressing social problems. Clubs and volunteer organizations experienced a veritable boom in membership. American experienced a civic renovation.

As Putnam says, “it would be tempting to say, ‘Life was much nicer back in the fifties. Would all the women please report to the kitchen and turn off the TV on the way?’ Social dislocation can easily breed a reactionary form of nostalgia. … My message is that we desperately need an era of civic inventiveness to create a renewed set of institutions and channels for invigorated civic life that will fit the way we have come to live.”