Nebraska’s rural communities were never more vital than in their early years when they were culturally much more diverse.  Though many factors contributed to this vitality, much of it stemmed from the interactions of immigrants from different backgrounds.  Germans, Irish, Czechs, Scandinavians, rich and poor, men and women.  All came to build a new life based on their personal definitions of success.

Even as late as the mid-1970s, when I first began working in a local retail store, there were people who still spoke broken English.  I imagine they had been born, raised and were living on the farms their ancestors had homesteaded.  At home they probably still spoke Norwegian.  And my wife, the great granddaughter of German immigrants, went to Kirche every Sunday instead of Church.

One can only imagine how Babel-like the language of the frontier must have been.  It’s amazing that neighbor could talk to neighbor.  And while self-reliance was the hallmark of the pioneer, at a time when the nearest store – or nearest doctor – was often several days away, people depended on neighbors far more than they do today.

Somehow it all worked.  Somehow the things the pioneers had in common outweighed their differences, enabling them to develop this land.  Yet the differences were very real; my family still has a little bag filled with coins from many countries, coins my great-great grandfather collected in his dealings with European immigrants.

It seems counterintuitive that people so diverse could create thriving rural communities.  One is forced to wonder if, as is the case with cities today, this diversity actually contributed to stronger, more vital communities.  Could the range of perspectives and experiences people from many different cultures possessed have contributed to overcoming the obstacles pioneers faced?  How could it not have?

The richer a culture, the stronger it is.  Cultural breadth and diversity, by exposing people to new ideas, stimulate creativity.  And creativity is humankind’s most valuable resource when dealing with growth and change.

For a long time many rural communities have struggled with growth and change.  Too-often this has led to no growth or change at all.  And though change can be frightening, life is change.  Communities that don’t change, whether located on the Plains or in the “Rust Belt,” die.

Since cultural richness and diversity equip people to better manage change, rural renewal is, at its heart, a matter of cultural revitalization.  Traditional agriculture, the “culture of the soil,” wove the many diverse aspect of life together.  Work, family, community were closely interrelated.  People moved smoothly from the field to the church to community activities.  No one facet of life dominated to the exclusion of all others; families, farms and rural communities all benefited from the talents and dedication of the men and women of the Plains.

But agriculture has changed.  The social and consumer diversity arising from four farm families per square mile has been lost.  More and more land is in the hands of fewer and fewer (often older) farmers, and no matter how well-intentioned, those who remain cannot sustain either the degree of commerce or the strong community organizations that the older system could.

There’s no turning back the clock, though.  What’s needed is a new approach to rural culture, one that again balances the diverse elements of life while embracing modern advances.

The World-Herald recently published excerpts from a speech by the chairman of the National Endowment for the Humanities, Jim Leach.  Mr. Leach explained that the humanities are the mirror of culture, and as such reflect the richness and diversity of human experience.  As Leach observed in a part of his speech that wasn’t included in the World-Herald, the humanities are “central to advancing human understanding and creativity” leading to “the democratization of ideas, providing broad and equal access to advances in knowledge and to the nation’s rich cultural heritage.”

Today we face the same challenge our ancestors did in the nineteenth century – to build a vital and sustainable rural culture.  To thrive, this new culture must be as multi-faceted as it was in the late 1800s.  Some communities, of course, still benefit from the contributions of immigrants, but many rural communities lack a diverse cultural milieu to help fuel their growth.  This is where the humanities can play a vital role.

It will take nothing less than a second wave of pioneering innovation to renew rural areas.  And because at its heart this is a cultural transformation, the “democratization of ideas” provided by the humanities is vital to “repioneering” the rural landscape.