Certainly an improvement in clarity and force over the first draft.

Two components, one mostly stylistic, the other more substantive, are still troubling me. "Value" is a word that has different meanings in different contexts. I don't know what you're gaining by contrasting plainly different meanings in the top and tail of the essay. What reader wouldn't agree that "home," or even a house, has "value" in different senses that are uncorrelated? Why is pointing that out important enough to do in the rhetorically most significant parts of the essay, the introduction and conclusion?

Second, there's a time scale differential in the discussion that seems to me confusing. One time scale is short-term, "as we recover from recession." Another is the time scale of your life: what we fought about at home as I was growing up. The third is about the transformation of work, and the scale is either decades or centuries, depending on how much of the process we consider to be involved. Yet the three time scales are mixed up—perhaps it would be right to say, entangled—in a fashion that confuses at least one reader.

A last question: is "home" really the subject, or is it "family"? Little of this actually seems to have to do with domestic architecture, and much more to do with domestic sentiment.

Is a House Just a Home?

The Modern Home

The Home's Place in the Future

Why "much of"? When wasn't it? And why "American history"? From who else's history are we distinguishing it, where "home" wasn't "an important piece of ... lives and goals and identity"?

They were places of freedom but also cultivated objects in which their owners could take pride.

Surely those are the homes of wealthy people, not all people? Is the log cabin, the clapboard shack, the prairie farmhouse a "cultivated object"?

Today, citizens still work for them, but most buy them instead of build them. The home has also been a lever upon which several legal and political battles have turned in this country. Emigrants from England came to this country to freely practice religion in their homes.

Some did, some did not. Almost all of them actually practiced their religions in churches and meeting houses. And there were many other kinds of people here, who weren't English. Because you haven't told us where you're going with this, we don't know which words in these sentences are important, or whether to worry about the possible difficulties your factual assertions are introducing. That's one of the many reasons you want to get your central idea articulated as early as possible.

White residents in early suburban neighborhoods created racial covenants to keep black citizens from having homes next to them.

Some residents in some neighborhoods. Sometimes it was Jews, sometimes both.

Even now, the home is important for how Americans see themselves and judge wealth in this country. The mortgage crisis was as much about a home to come back to as it was about jobs and finances.

What was the outline for this paragraph? It seems to wander. Let's figure out what the central idea is here, and express it tightly, developing it clearly through a series of connected sentences.

To take one particular point, I don't understand the idea that "convenience" is somehow in tension with "the constructive home." Homes are becoming workplaces again, one might say, after the two centuries in which industrialization separated the workplace from the residence. The "labor-saving" materials and devices of the American post-war home marked it as a place of less "domestic employment," with fewer or no servants. The production occurring at home is now mostly information, not woven cloth or eggs and milk for market.

Again, I don't understand the sequence of the sentences. What is the central idea of this paragraph, and how do the sentences that follow express aspects or developments of that idea? Maybe exposing the headings of the outline would help.

The Politics of Home

-- By MarcusStrong - 15 May 2012

I’ve always wanted a big house, with big windows that let in a ton of light, hardwood floors, a study with floor-to-ceiling bookshelves, and a few acres of land surrounding it (not for a lawn and shrubbery but for a small farm). It’s probably because my family moved a lot when I as a kid, well into my teenage years, and no place ever felt like mine. But the desire for a home of my own is also part of my inheritance as an American.

The Modern Home

For much of American history, the home has been an important piece of citizens’ lives and goals and identity. They were places of freedom but also cultivated objects in which their owners could take pride. Today, citizens still work for them, but most buy them instead of build them. The home has also been a lever upon which several legal and political battles have turned in this country. Emigrants from England came to this country to freely practice religion in their homes. White residents in early suburban neighborhoods created racial covenants to keep black citizens from having homes next to them. Even now, the home is important for how Americans see themselves and judge wealth in this country. The mortgage crisis was as much about a home to come back to as it was about jobs and finances. Given our history and changes in technology, thinking about the place of the home in our lives will be important as citizens and families recover. Given those changes though, is the home still important? The modern home, like many parts of today’s commercial world, is marked by convenience. The goal isn’t just a home to call your own, but one with all the comforts of automation: automated coffee machines, automated washers and dryers, and constant temperature control. Oh, let’s not forgot DVR. To me, these qualities reinforce complacency, about our own lives and the complex politics of the world outside. As someone constantly thinking about my future, the dichotomy between the lives we build for work and the lives we build for home seems strange. Why can’t the home be a creative space as well as a place of rest? Personally, I’m worried that as my commitments to school and to career deepen, I won’t have any gateway for knowledge and self-exploration. When I’m not relaxing, I want my future home to be as constructive a workplace as my future office. Every citizen doesn’t share the same feelings. Especially in today’s economy, people want to take a break after struggling to keep their job or maintain their family financial status quo. But I think the struggle of today’s economy is an exact reason to create a constructive home. Without any opportunity elsewhere, many people are forced to work from home to create opportunities, especially young people. My classmates and I are fortunate enough to be in New York for law school, but many of our generation have returned home to their parents and were already there in the first place. As good entry-level jobs become harder to procure and education costs rise, there’s a need to able to learn outside of the classroom and the office.

Home Is Where the Heart Is

That may be an argument for leaving the home behind completely. I have friends for whom location has never been important, and for whom being able to function in a globalized economy is more important. But that’s a naïve proposition considering our current political climate. The most intense political debates in the news cycle are domestic, both in terms of the nation and the home. Whatever side of the political aisle, people care less about global work competency and more about who will live next door. Debates over gay marriage and illegal immigration show that many people’s true political values stem from the home. As a child, it’s where you learn and develop your own political and moral views. As an adult or parent, it’s often where you exercise those views or protect them. But even though I value home as a personal workplace, valuing the home as a bastion of political ideas scares me. When I first conceived of this essay, I thought of my future home as my own ideological bunker, where I could freely consider my thoughts and act upon my moral and political values without hindrance. I could cook and eat only whole grains and locally sourced produce, and not consume more than I needed. I could raise kids who believe that gay, straight, bisexual, or transgender doesn’t matter and that all should be equally respected and loved as people. I could invite all my friends, poor, middle-class, or wealthy, to my home together, no matter how big or small. But does that prevent me from experiencing a part of the world? I think back to high school kids I mentored in college, whose goals were to be rappers or athletes because they hadn’t seen other models for them to aspire to. But even though I’ve seen more models of life than them, maybe I’m putting up the walls of a future ideology and forgetting the doors.

A House Is Not a Home

Neither type of home, global and wide reaching or reflective and constrained, is right or wrong. Within and between each one is a myriad of ways to live and to build a home. But any home can be limiting if taken to an extreme. As we recover from the economic crisis and find a path out of our current political crisis, I still want to concern myself with building a home where hard work is valued over convenience. I still want a place for constructive reflection of my work, my ideas, and my desires for the world. But should I procure and maintain that space at the expense of anyone else, or their ideas? My house might be mine, but maybe my home is the place to share.

(Eben, I would like to continue editing this over the summer.)

• #Set ALLOWTOPICVIEW = TWikiAdminGroup, MarcusStrong
• #Set DENYTOPICVIEW = TWikiGuest

Note: TWiki has strict formatting rules for preference declarations. Make sure you preserve the three spaces, asterisk, and extra space at the beginning of these lines. If you wish to give access to any other users simply add them to the comma separated ALLOWTOPICVIEW list.