Cultural Role of Cities

 

The Cultural Role of Cities: From Civilizational Lighthouses to Engines of Change

When we think about cities, we often default to the "bricks and mortar" view—the skyscrapers, the transit systems, and the dense crowds. Early urban sociology, particularly the "Chicago School" of the 1930s, reinforced this by focusing on the city as a physical and social organism. Louis Wirth’s famous 1938 essay, Urbanism as a Way of Life, argued that the sheer scale and density of cities inevitably led to a "fragmentation" of the human experience. To Wirth, the city was a place where traditional social ties withered away, replaced by impersonal, superficial interactions.

But if you look at the history of human civilization, this "decline of culture" narrative doesn't quite hold up. In the 1950s, Robert Redfield and Milton Singer challenged this view, suggesting that cities aren't just places where tradition goes to die. Instead, they argued that the city is a "cultural engine" that either preserves a civilization’s core values or generates entirely new ones. Their 1954 paper, The Cultural Role of Cities, remains the gold standard for understanding this dynamic.

The Moral Lighthouse vs. The Market Square

The most important takeaway from Redfield and Singer is the distinction between orthogenetic and heterogenetic cities. It’s not just a matter of size; it’s a matter of function.

An orthogenetic city acts as a "moral lighthouse." These are cities like Varanasi, Kyoto, or Rome, which exist to carry forward what Redfield called the "Great Tradition" of a civilization. In these spaces, the elite—the priests, scholars, and rulers—take the messy, localized folk cultures (the "Little Traditions") of the villages and refine them into formal religion, law, and philosophy. The cultural role of the orthogenetic city is stabilization. It provides a society with its sense of sacred continuity.

On the other hand, you have the heterogenetic city—the city of the "market and the frontier." Think of London, Mumbai, or New York. These cities are defined by trade, colonial contact, and the collision of different worldviews. Their role isn't to preserve the old, but to forge the new. They are sites of innovation, dissent, and often, the breakdown of old habits. If the orthogenetic city is a container for tradition, the heterogenetic city is a furnace for change.

Primary and Secondary Urbanization: The Indian Context

This distinction is especially useful when looking at the "Folk-Urban Continuum" in places like India. Redfield pointed out that there are two ways urbanization happens. Primary urbanization is an internal process where a culture evolves its own cities out of its own folk roots. The transformation is organic; the city remains a "sacred center" for its people.

However, secondary urbanization is often a disruptive, external force—the kind we see in the wake of colonialism. When a modern city is "dropped" into an ancient culture, it creates a clash. Milton Singer’s work in Madras (now Chennai) in the late 1960s is a classic example of how this tension plays out. Singer found that instead of being "Westernized" into secularism, the people of Madras were actually using modern urban tools—theaters, radio, and printing presses—to revitalize classical traditions like Carnatic music and Bharatanatyam. The city didn't destroy the "Great Tradition"; it modernized the stage on which it was performed.

A Critical Pivot: Power, Hegemony, and Absorption

It’s easy to look at the Redfield-Singer model as a harmonious, almost poetic view of how culture flows. But we have to be careful not to ignore the power dynamics involved. This is where modern critiques, like those of Abhijit Guha, become essential.

In his 2018 critique of Nirmal Kumar Bose (found in Scrutinising the Hindu Method of Tribal Absorption), Guha reminds us that "tradition" is often an ideology used by the privileged class. Bose’s theory—that tribes were "absorbed" into the Hindu caste system because they sought the economic security of a "non-competitive" urban guild—assumes a level of consent that might not have existed.

If we apply Guha’s skepticism to the "Cultural Role of the City," we see that the "orthogenetic" function isn't always a neutral "moral lighthouse." It can be a tool of subjugation. When the "Great Tradition" of a city absorbs a "Little Tradition" from the tribal hinterland, it’s not always a peaceful cultural exchange. Often, it involves marginalizing the tribal group into a low-status caste position, effectively "absorbing" them into the urban hierarchy at the bottom. The city’s cultural role, then, can be as much about exclusion and control as it is about preservation.

The City in the Global Age

Where does this leave us in the 21st century? The role of the city has shifted again, moving toward what Saskia Sassen calls the "Global City." Today, cities like Singapore, Dubai, and London are increasingly "de-nationalized." Their cultural role isn't necessarily to carry forward a local "Great Tradition" or to mediate with a local "Little Tradition." Instead, they serve a new, global elite.

The "Great Tradition" of the 21st century is the culture of global finance, technology, and consumerism. This creates a strange homogenization—a business district in London looks and feels almost identical to one in Shanghai. As Lewis Mumford noted in The City in History, the city has always been a "container" for human culture, but today that container is becoming increasingly detached from its geographic roots.

Final Observations

To understand the cultural role of the city, we have to look past the demographic data and the urban planning maps. We have to see the city as a dual force: it is the "magnet" that draws diverse people together, and it is the "container" that stores the best (and sometimes the worst) of what those people produce. Whether it’s acting as a stabilizer for an ancient tradition or as an engine for a globalized future, the city remains the primary site where human identity is negotiated, contested, and ultimately defined.

---

References

• Bose, N. K. (1941). The Hindu Method of Tribal Absorption. Science and Culture, 7.

• Guha, A. (2018). Scrutinising the Hindu Method of Tribal Absorption. Economic & Political Weekly, 53(17).

• Mumford, L. (1961). The City in History: Its Origins, Its Transformations, and Its Prospects. Harcourt, Brace & World.

• Redfield, R. (1941). The Folk Culture of Yucatan. University of Chicago Press.

• Redfield, R., & Singer, M. (1954). The Cultural Role of Cities. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 3(1), 53–73.

• Sassen, S. (2001). The Global City: New York, London, Tokyo. Princeton University Press.

• Singer, M. (1972). When a Great Tradition Modernizes: An Anthropological Approach to Indian Civilization. Praeger Publishers.

• Wirth, L. (1938). Urbanism as a Way of Life. American Journal of Sociology, 44(1), 1–24.