Skip to main content icon/video/no-internet

Drawing informed conclusions about community life in Appalachia is difficult. Geographically, the region is divided into three quite different subregions that have given rise to a variety of community forms and experiences. In addition, no consensus exists on what constitutes Appalachia's boundaries. The most widely accepted view, as offered by the Appalachian Regional Commission, is a specific geographical definition of 410 counties in thirteen states extending over 995 miles from southern New York to northeastern Mississippi. This area is home to nearly 23 million people. This definition, shaped in large part by the efforts of politicians to include their jurisdictions in a specific government initiative, encompasses large cities such as Pittsburgh and Birmingham; the suburbs of Cincinnati, Memphis, and Atlanta; towns and cities dominated by coal, chemical, and textile industries; tourist and agricultural economies; and numerous small rural counties with populations of under 10,000. The Appalachian region is so diverse that government officials have divided it into northern, central, and southern subregions. Social and economic conditions vary widely between and within the subregions.

This diversity, along with a number of scholarly studies, gives lie to the popularly held notion of Appalachia as “a coherent region inhabited by an homogeneous population possessing a uniform culture” (Shapiro 1978, p. ix), which was first put forth by local color writers, missionaries, educators, social reformers, and industrialists between 1870 and 1920. But this myth, which is linked to degrading hillbilly stereotypes of Appalachians, persists today and is one of the reasons why most residents in the region do not use the term Appalachian to describe themselves or their communities.

The Study of Community Life in Appalachia

Few reputable regionwide studies of community life in Appalachia exist. Even the earliest of these studies caution against generalizations concerning residents of the region. The majority of community studies focus on a single community or county, usually in central Appalachia—the poorest and most rural section of the region—or in the more rural areas of southern Appalachia. Until the mid-1970s, with a few notable exceptions, these studies shared the assumption that the far-reaching social and economic problems prevalent in Appalachia were the result of forces unique to the Appalachian region. In particular, these studies often linked low educational achievement, dysfunctional families, violence, poverty, welfare dependency, and a host of other community problems to the existence of an Appalachian folk culture that had failed to prepare its people for the cooperative, interrelated, technical society in which they now lived. During this same period, family and community historians of Appalachia were offering a romanticized notion of a preindustrial Appalachia that closely exemplified Thomas Jefferson's democratic vision of self-sufficient communities characterized by widespread land ownership, a relatively equal distribution of resources, few class distinctions, and egalitarian cooperation.

Beginning in the late 1970s, a new generation of Appalachian scholars began to examine the devastating impact of modernization and concentrated corporate ownership and power on communities in Appalachia. Community studies now explored how the social and economic hardships faced by local residents were not a result of a defective folk culture peculiar to the region but rather were a direct consequence of corporate and government policies and actions that left people dependent upon a national and global economy. Relatedly, by locating the preindustrial history of Appalachia in the context of global capitalism, scholars are discovering the ways in which persistent poverty in Appalachian communities has been linked to the historical interaction of capitalist markets and state policies. A study by Dwight Billings and Kathleen Blee (2000) is particularly notable in this regard. This study makes clear that Appalachian communities are very much a part and product of the American mainstream and demonstrates the varied ways they survive and change in the face of economic crisis.

...

  • Loading...
locked icon

Sign in to access this content

Get a 30 day FREE TRIAL

  • Watch videos from a variety of sources bringing classroom topics to life
  • Read modern, diverse business cases
  • Explore hundreds of books and reference titles

Sage Recommends

We found other relevant content for you on other Sage platforms.

Loading