Not only America’s middle and upper classes, but also its working classes have constituted a nation of home-owners for generations. Whether suburban ranch houses, urban row houses or, more recently lofts, condominia and co-ops, homeownership has been the mark of solid citizenship. Moreover, the generally detached home and yard enshrines principles of individuality family, freedom and responsibility In the 1990s, 70 percent of new immigrants acquired a home within twenty years of arrival; mortgages and government support, including tax breaks, reaffirm this centrality for old and new citizens. Apartments, primarily rental, denote the freedom of young adulthood or the post-familial conditions of old age—high density residential hotels, as Paul Groth (1994) notes, imply failure rather than alternative housing. Economic crises are measured, in turn, by downturns in home construction and the problems of first-time buyers.

The ideal of home-ownership was ingrained in American culture in the early Republic.

By the Victorian period, in Philadelphia, PA, for example, many workers acquired their own row houses while more elaborate cottages were built in streetcar and railroad suburbs. After the Second World War, Levittowns and other developments promised new suburban houses to expanding families of the baby boom. While mortgages represent imposing debts (an appropriate mortgage is calculated at four times annual family income), payments on interest are tax deductible, facilitating purchase. For many families since the 1970s, homes have become their primary investment, seemingly gaining in value every year. Losses have been terrifying signs of neighborhood decay (blockbusting, deindustrialization) or wider recession.

The ideal house also codifies basic elements of the American family including individual space, casual living (including outdoor areas) and display Kitchens as well as recreation rooms encourage “family time.” Bedrooms for each family member and even individual bathrooms foster privacy. Gender roles have been emphasized in women’s control of private spaces (kitchens and bedrooms) and display areas, while men are associated especially with dens/recreational rooms, garages/workshops and outdoor areas. Garages, additional rooms, architectural flourishes like cathedral ceilings, elaborate staircases and outdoor facilities also mark differences in status. These may be incorporated into building codes that require multi-acre lots or stylistic conformity Competition fosters continual home improvement (also a title of a popular 1990s sitcom satirizing do-it-yourself efforts), which can draw on accrued equity. Relations with neighbors and local institutions (schools are generally supported by property taxes) sustain the ideological centrality of the house for citizenship.

As housing follows inflation, issues of affordability and homelessness have underscored the resources necessary to sustain the American dream. Mobile homes, rental properties and transient housing offer alternatives without undercutting the centrality of “home” to individual and family identity. Co-housing and specialized retirement or dependent planning have challenged the spatial meanings of home, as have feminist critiques (Wright, Hayden). Yet, the identity of America and home is underscored by mass media that treat both the attainment of home-ownership and the violation of the home as central dramas of American life.