SiegelAnnotation8

Ariel Siegel, Annotation 8 October 23th, 2011 The End of Suburbia WC: 879

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
 * 1) The End of Suburbia, Gregory Greene, 2004
 * 1) The main argument of the story is focused here is also a focus on the pursuit of information that argues sustainability and environmental awareness with respect to the American culture and the increasing suburban population. It addresses peak oil prices and the correlation of oil use in the suburbs. It is rather common for driveways to contain a car for each member of the family, and the consumption and especially the amount of traffic.
 * 1) The main argument is sustained via the analysis of the American Dream and the transition to the cookie-cutter suburban culture can be seen through emphasis on advertising a swell homemaker household with a sense of space, financial attainability, family morals, and a transition to higher social status. The view of suburbia with a twist of oil depletion has become increasingly common with the price of gas as a main conversation starter. The economy is tied to our use on fossil fuels and the film attempts to show this hypocrisy and uses quite alarming testimonies from scientists, however the film does address our immobility to face these issues head on before they turn into problems. There is a comic representation of suburbia and this “outdated” way of life. The argument does not rely on science but introduces comprehensive evidence and material in an interesting method.
 * 1) The sustainability problems that this film demonstrates includes: economic, cultural with roots in influencing our behavior, as well as technological. This film tackles a cultural aspect of our consumption and relates it to peak oil. There are different technologies that we can apply to conquer the issue however our behavior is based upon the American values and inability to react intellectually and logically to a situation. As we have twisted the American Dream into an attainable content social and economical footing in society. We have used energy inefficiently, draining the resources and tightening the realism of suburbia as a sustainability problem itself.
 * 1) The parts of the film that were most compelling include the use of humor and evidence of suburbia as a blackhole consuming unreasonably amounts of resources, especially with respect to energy. In every sustainability argument and solution everything is stagnant, we cannot move to the future but attempt to reapply the American Dream as freedom and pursuit of happiness. This is what prolongs the immobility, its a paralysis that is unlike any villain. It is inherent in all of us to want a better future for our progeny. There needs to be a shift now in the perception of the future with emphasis on general wellbeing and morality
 * 1) The parts of the film that were not convincing were later addressed in //Escape from Suburbia// which did provide examples of communities that implemented changes within their society towards a more sustainable lifestyle. A lifestyle built around sustainability, not sustainability built around a lifestyle.
 * 2) The film best addresses the suburban population and also wants to shed light to the problems. In some instances we will only act when slapped in the face with publicity and media. There needs to be proof in order for Americans to accept trade-offs, in some cases the implementation of these trade-offs are ignored.
 * 1) In order to enhance the environmental educational value of the film, the following could improve the overall message of the film by focusing on examples within society that can be implemented to change the perspective of what is the right (and possibly only) path to the future.
 * 1) Suggestions for actions or points of intervention were not stressed but rather demonstrates that the American Dream is a major contributor in the energy crisis as well as other social, cultural, economical, and ecological issues. Points of intervention begins after we acknowledge the problem.
 * 1) Due to the importance of this issue, after doing more research two references shed light on the issue in a way in which the film did not fulfill my interest. Personally, I grew up in a suburban house with liberal behaviors which did not exactly fit within the cookie cutter neighborhood. In order to view the effect on the cultural, one of the references includes a NY Times article on suburbs and an environmentalists attack on the understanding and interaction with nature. Tidwell organized a small group to fertilize corn to be used for heat. This was a rather large move, and has spread to other locations. Where a green home is merely green due to the lawn, no sustainable technologies or practices are present. What is so good about it?... Nothing

Williams, Alex. “Don't Let the Grass Fool You.” NY Times. 10 February 2008. <<[]>>

The next reference that intrigued me led me to the sequel of this film (as stated before). But this resource is directed to sustainable living. It is a global resource, open to all who want to spread their practices and behaviors. The changes can be small but it is still a step to the future. This is somehow also enabling suburbs to still be a prime real estate location which is now taking a hit due to the financial instability and dependence on loans.

McCulloch, Kirsten. “Sustainable Suburbia: Striving for a low impact lifestyle.” 2010. <<[]>>