In Dividing Paradise, sociologist Jennifer Sherman explores the economic and social transformation of the anonymized “Paradise Valley,” a cluster of small, rural towns in Washington State. Once known for ranching, logging, and orchard crops, the valley faced economic decline until in-migrants from urban areas sought the area's natural beauty, relatively affordable housing, and opportunities for outdoor recreation. Looking beyond the standard narratives of success and decline in rural America, Sherman problematizes newcomers' efforts toward gentrification by considering the “human costs of the commodification of the rural ideal” (3).Initially drawn to Paradise Valley in 2009 by opportunities to rock climb, ski, and hike, Sherman was intrigued by small communities that thrived in the aftermath of the Great Recession. By the end of the twentieth century, deindustrialization, restrictions on public land use, and environmental factors destabilized the local economy dependent on agriculture and extractive industries. Over the course of several visits, however, she observed once-nondescript small towns rapidly adding amenities catering to middle- and high-income consumers: coffee shops, restaurants, yoga studios, art galleries, boutiques, and high-end hotels. These developments presented a striking contrast to Sherman's experiences in a northern California logging town that served as the basis for her first book, Those Who Work, Those Who Don't: Poverty, Morality, and Family in Rural America (2009). Her curiosity led her to conduct this ethnographic study beginning in September 2014. In keeping with disciplinary conventions, the names of places and people have all been changed.Paradise Valley is premised on the division of residents into two opposing groups: rural working-class old-timers and mostly urban in-migrant newcomers. While acknowledging the complexities within those designations, Sherman selected the terms because they were commonly used by locals and they sufficiently represented tensions “without openly disparaging either group” (32). Newcomers, who typically lived in the area for less than fifteen years, tended to have greater social and cultural capital, higher incomes, and more educational attainment than old-timers. They tended to hold liberal political views, whereas old-timers were more likely to hold conservative or ambiguous political views. Old-timers were also more likely to have experienced trauma and substance abuse. Interestingly, because most of the residents identified as white, Sherman noted that “race was not an issue that either group acknowledged openly” (34). Nevertheless, newcomers and old-timers “lived separate lives with divergent goals and struggles, not knowing each other well enough to even understand one another's worldviews and motivations” (192).Sherman allows the words spoken by residents of Paradise Valley to drive the narrative, emphasizing how lived experiences shape perspectives. For example, she finds that old-timers' political views have an actual basis in their daily realities. With diminished social and cultural capital and little generational wealth, old-timers face an unstable labor market, limited access to affordable housing, and few opportunities to fully engage in the community. In their experience, government entities create more problems than they solve. This is where Sherman identifies the nexus of the problem. She takes issue with the newcomers' propensity for community improvement through their faith in government, private donations, and nonprofit organizations. Newcomers described their intense engagement as volunteers and board members for more than seventy nonprofits found in the valley. Though overwhelmed by these commitments, they share firm convictions that the community benefits from their work on sports and recreation, education, conservation, the arts, politics, poverty alleviation, and social services. Unable to see past their good intentions, newcomers fail to see one critical shortcoming: viewing old-timers as clients rather than active participants.Real growth in Paradise Valley requires newcomers to recognize their role in furthering structural inequalities. The first step is forming meaningful relationships with old-timers and “come to deeper and more respectful understandings of those individuals who have been less fortunate in finding ways to navigate the current economic and social conditions” (205). Reshaping rural America requires large-scale efforts as well as grassroots activism that transcends the barriers of social class.With its proximity to larger cities, Paradise Valley has successfully shifted its economy toward tourism while attracting permanent residents with sufficient wealth and resources to retire or simply enjoy small-town life. While this type of transformation is not possible in most rural communities, and the narrative focuses on recent developments (taking readers up through the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic), Sherman presents an incredibly useful case study for historians of American agriculture. As we grapple with the often paradoxical notions of social class in rural spaces, Sherman's compassionate approach and accessible narrative provide a compelling framework for understanding perceptions of social dynamics in the countryside.
Search from 250 M+ research papersSearch from 250 M+ research papers
Jan 10, 2024
Nathan Williams 
Open Access