" Is the unavoidable physical component of relationships tied to "place" that factor which makes them seem more concrete?"

Only if you're a hard-core pro-feudalist; serfs are rather unavoidably tied to the land, and their relationships are really pretty concrete ...

Clearly, a certain amount of freedom and social equality is necessary, else Russians under Stalin or Chinese under Mao would have had the very bestest communities ever.

of course, given the pro-agrarian attitudes of the crunchy types, they're probably not too unsympathetic to the idea of serfdom (and the usually attendant religious oppression).

Q: Do you think it's necessary to actually physically be with someone in order to develop the relationships needed to avoid the isolation you speak of?

Good question Nick. The short answer is, as Rev. Lovejoy would say, "no, with a but." You can certainly bond with someone online to a certain extent, but who is that real person behind the projected identity of "Nick Blesch" or "PM" or "Joshua Claybourn"? "Necessary" -- not all the time, not constantly -- but it certainly helps.

Can you really bond with a person you only know as an avatar?

I agree with you, David, and I agree not just with respect to online friends but with people in our individual "real" lives as well.

There was a lot of discussion in the 1970s about how quality was better than quantity when it came to relationships - the context at the time was the time parents spent with their children, and the conclusion was that both quality and quantity are necessary.

I think we're hitting that realization now in terms of all of our significant relationships - it isn't enough to just call or email, although those tools can help when you don't have the time to do a face-to-face. There is just no substitute for the physical presence of and interaction with real friends and family on a regular basis.

Look at the online quizzes on mental health, particularly in relation to depressive illnesses. One of the bulwark questions is whether the individual has at least one person in his life with whom he can really talk about things.

To a certain extent, the Church - in the Biblical, rather than the denominational or ecumenical sense - is supposed to be that community, but I don't think the individuals in many churches know how to do that. At least, in the Midwest they have a little more trouble, whether because of cultural issues or the mobility you talk about in discussing discipline of place.

My parents moved to Alabama three years ago. Since they've been there, they've observed how the local communities handle different life events, such as birthday or graduation parties, major illnesses, even deaths.

When there is a birthday party or a graduation party, the adults all congregate wherever the party is while the children play. There is instruction for the little ones that you really look at the card, acknowledge who it's from, really look at the gift, find something to appreciate about it and then specifically thank the person who gave it.

This happens with each item, and it happens with each child. The parties take forever, because it takes that long to properly acknowledge those people who came to celebrate with you.

When someone is in the hospital, people don't just send flowers or a card. They come to the hospital during visiting hours and they sit there and talk with the sick person, if he is well enough, or with the family if he isn't.

They will volunteer to go fetch coffee or something if it's needed, but the most touching thing is that they just sit and talk - they hold people's hands or put a hand on the person's or the family's arm or shoulder.

With funerals, the whole community knows about the death - I don't know yet how they do this - and every one passing by the house knows to slow down because everyone "stops" to sit with the family.

And they don't just pop in, say a few words and then leave. They stay, sometimes for an hour or two. They bring food. They come back again for the funeral service. They visit and bring food for I don't know how long after the funeral service is over.

I think we're often too busy to take the kind of time to do those things that it takes to do them well, and as a result, I think we're losing the knowledge or practice of how to really be in community with other people.

You're right - to some extent it takes being in the same place long enough to create and maintain the habits that nurture real relationships, but it also takes time and a recognition that such acts are necessary.

Sorry if I kind of went on and on there, but I hope you write more about this subject because it's a good one!! :)

David:

This is somewhat repeating what lc1 said, but I think you have that same worry (who is the real Joshua Claybourn?) even in real life. I've certainly met people before and thought I knew them, only to realize that the person I knew was merely a facade. That can happen online, as well - and it's certainly easier to hide things online - but I think it's just as possible whether in real life or online.

lc1:

There is just no substitute for the physical presence of and interaction with real friends and family on a regular basis...One of the bulwark questions is whether the individual has at least one person in his life with whom he can really talk about things.

This is sort of what I was getting at: if you have someone you can really talk about things with, does it matter if it's via email, or on the phone, or in the guildroom in World of Warcraft? There is absolutely nothing inehrent in the concept of "someone you can talk about things with" that implies "someone who is physically in your presence." Were it otherwise, all long distance relationships (whether romantic or platonic) would be doomed to fail, I would think.

Nick - I think to a point you're right; it probably doesn't matter if the exchange occurs via email, or on the phone, or in the guildroom in World of Warcraft [BTW, is there really a World of Warcraft? ;)].

But even strong long-distance relationships can be destroyed without enough face-time. And there is a legitimate and documented human need for touch - plus, if [whatever] percentage of our communication is non-verbal, and the individual is not physically present, how much of what is really being said is effectively communicated without physical presence?

I think technology can and does help individuals maintain community when they can't be in the same physical place. I just don't think it's a complete substitute, and I think David's point of maintaining ties to a place - home base, if you will - as a commitment to community is just as important if not more so, because of the effect human contact has in our lives.

I think we're talking about the same thing - and I have to take my hat off to people who can maintain community by remote - but I have to come down on the side of putting down roots, particularly in a physical sense, in this discussion. It comes down to a choice, and while we may not always have control over our physical moves, at some point, we can err in the opposite direction and choose to move rather than stay put and build depth in our relationships.

I think it is possible to bond with people online, but I have to admit that I haven't. By my thinking it takes a really concerted effort that I simply haven't been willing to make.