This is NOT Democracy.

I find that this quote sums up Gilbert's chapter on Pullman beautifully: "But Pullman residents were players, not, ultimately, consumers of...culture; they were part of the decor"(166).   Altogether, the chapter infuriated me.  While I saw some similarities to Riis' How the Other Half Lives, in the fact that Pullman believed strongly that "architecture could affect behavior"(149), I felt that his view was far less uplifting than Riis' condemnation of tenement housing.   While Riis stressed the ills of working class culture, he did not go so far as to suggest banning the participation in culture.  He saw better as a primary means to incite "better" habits.  I felt that Pullman, on the other hand, was highly aristocratic in his conception Pullman (the city).  I did not see the city as democratic in any particular way, except in the fact that everyone was assumed to enjoy the same types of activities, regardless of reality.  While everyone was roughly given the status of "middle class,"  there were still vast distinctions between foremen and engineers and other workers.   Some were given elaborate housing, whereas others lived in homes that looked nice, but which they could barely afford.   I found it particularly shocking that Pullman, "refus[ed] to sell any housing"(160).  People were not even allowed to own their own property!  This is one of the main tenants of democratic society: the ability to own one's own PROPERTY.   The fact that Pullman denied this basic right absolutely eliminates Pullman from any sort of competition for a "model democratic culture."   Beyond this, the fact that all cultural activities were strictly limited to those deemed "socially appropriate," by Pullman himself is despotic, not democratic.  In a true Democracy, people are free to practice what activities they wish so long as they do not interfere with others' rights or safety.   Sadly, however, I believe that Walt Whitman would have approved of this particular construction of society.   Pullman absolutely reflected his wish to incorporate a unified standard of culture and Literature, as evidenced by his wife's creation of Shakespeare appreciation clubs, French and German Classes, dance classes, and theater groups.   Ideally, Pullman's society would have elevated the working class to a high standard of culture along the lines of Whitman's ideal, however, cultural control was achieved at the expense of personal freedom, one of the main elements of democracy.  Pullman's "experiment" within the city demonstrates that the positive effects of "culture" cannot be maintained forever if they are forced.  Culture, by nature is a force that must come from the people.  It cannot be something imposed upon citizens by a wealthier power.  The eventual destruction of Pullman as an experiment in city planning demonstrates that social and environmental factors are not the only determining factors of a successful society.  Personal agency is critical in allowing communities to function, for without personal choice, people become "decor," controlled by outside forces, rather than meaningful participants in the growth and preservation of a community.