America Needs A “Third Place”

A “third place” is a social space that is distinct from the two “usual” environments of home (i.e. “first place”) and work (i.e. “second place”). In both popular press accounts
and marketing/consumer research, third places are often characterized as readily accessible social venues frequented by regulars but open to all comers. Something like a community center, coffee house, cafe or “mom and pop” restaurant. Third places become community congregation points and, importantly, provide a centralized “sense of place” that facilitates creative interaction among people. This interaction can amount to “everyday” social engagement (i.e. water cooler chat, gossip, laughing with friends), but hopefully also includes civic discourse. The idea is to give folks an outlet to talk to one another, and address issues that are important to them as a community.

Compared to what I have experienced abroad in the tea shops and espresso houses of Asia and Europe, the United States has a relatively underdeveloped “third place infrastructure.” I have not examined the historical evidence, but I believe during the early development of the nation, citizens participated more in third place interaction.

Chalk it up to modernization and the rise of digital interaction, but the third place seems to have diminished in importance in American society. While I still see vestiges of third place interaction at Starbucks or even discussions among neighbors in the parking lot at Wal-Mart, these outlets are “impromptu” third places and do not constitute a consistent, welcoming space for regular engagement, which is an important criterion for being a third place. In the case of Starbucks, despite presenting a seemingly inviting space with soft couches and hip jazz music, their coffee shops are largely designed to maintain customer throughput, not congregation.

Perhaps the loss of the third place banter has something to do with the ongoing outbursts and general lack of civility during town hall meetings across America (which seems to have spilled over into congressional engagements). Dramatic changes (perceived or otherwise) in the way the nation is being governed is certainly an impetus for the passionate exchanges during these meetings. But could it be that the prior lack of ongoing face-to-face discourse and dialogue — impromptu town hall meetings on a small scale via third places — has contributed to the current powder keg?