xt7mpg1hmk2n https://exploreuk.uky.edu/dips/xt7mpg1hmk2n/data/mets.xml Kentucky University of Kentucky. Center for Developmental Change 1968 Other contributors include Cain, Stephen R. Photocopies. Unit 1, copy 2 is a photocopy issued by the clearinghouse for Federal Scientific and Technical Information. Report of a study by an interdisciplinary team of the University of Kentucky, performed under Contract 693 between the University of Kentucky Research Foundation and the Office of Economic Opportunity, 1965-68. Includes bibliographical references. Part of the Bert T. Combs Appalachian Collection. books  English  Contact the Special Collections Research Center for information regarding rights and use of this collection.  Community Action Program (U.S.) Economic assistance, Domestic--Kentucky--Knox county. Poor--Kentucky--Knox County Community Action in Appalachia: An Appraisal of the "War on Poverty" in a Rural Setting of Southeastern Kentucky, August 1968; Unit 3: A Selective Description of a Knox County Mountain Neighborhood text Community Action in Appalachia: An Appraisal of the "War on Poverty" in a Rural Setting of Southeastern Kentucky, August 1968; Unit 3: A Selective Description of a Knox County Mountain Neighborhood 1968 2016 true xt7mpg1hmk2n section xt7mpg1hmk2n A BTELE "TIVE DESORIPTIONROF A
KNO" "OUNT 
MOUNTAIN NEIGHBORHOOD
UNIT P
STFPQEN R. "AIN
August 1968
/

 ···•
COMMUN1.'|'Y1\(L'I`1ON IN APPALACHIA
An A])[`)I'J11H(l1 of the "War on Poverty"
in :1 Rum! Setting of Southeastern Kentucky
(Report of an utuny by nn interdlsci,p1lnz1ry team of the
University of l tint- siicmw-ss; ol" tlne Ctnnnnini ty Al·ti<>n l’rcn;r;1m. line
llnllowiing hritdizliscussion of [lawn- themes mhwminstrates the necessity
of understanding the culture of the potential acceptor.
Self—lmage and Etiquette
Knowledge of and respect for the self—image of the potential
acceptor is crucial to the success of the program. The mountain
dweller is aware of the stereotype of the "hillbilly" which is
maintained by the outside world. His relationship with outsiders
is affected by his self—image and by the outsider's image of the
mountain dweller, as reflected in the former's behavior toward the
latter. '|'he change agent must discard all erroneous preconceptions
:1nd alenunistrattwqin zqnirenizitiini of nuiuntaiii lifc· if lu= is tc) be
accepted.
Just as the change agent must be careful not to damage the
self~image of the potential acceptor, so must he be careful not to
violate the norms of the culture. Adherence to the rules of etiquette
is vital to the maintenance of smooth social relationships. A fag;
pas committed by the change agent arouses the suspicion that falls
not only upon the outsider, but upon all inhabitants of the area
ll. 2

 I
who deviate from normal behavior. Knowledge of etiquette and the
patterns of nonverbal communication, then,is vital to the success of
the change agent and, ultimately, of his program.
Family and Political Influence
Family is the point of orientation and source of security for the
mountain inhabitant. As such, it has a tremendous influence on behavior.
The Community Action Program requires a reorientation away from the
family to a larger social unit; such a reorientation is difficult to
accomplish. Further, an individual always has the support of his kin
group; if he rejects the innovation, it is quite likely that members
of his family will also reject it. This means that sometimes an entire
neighborhood will not participate. Consequently, the change agent must
understand the nature of family relations in the mountain neighborhood.
The family is also quite important in the wielding of political
influence. The notion that the poor are politically helpless does not
A prove true in the mountain culture. People have influence, and they
handle it with methods that are normative to that culture. Such
methods must be recognized and understood when introducing an innovation
into the society.
Cooperation
The centers in the Community Action Program serve designated
geographical areas that are expected to cooperate in order to bring
about change. lt is necessary, then, to determine the effectiveness
of such areas as cooperative units. While the research has not shed
O
3

 · considerable light on this matter, still it has produced some evidence
that {ln- prolmlvlllly ol ('Ul)|N'l'$Il lon wllhlu Ihc <·¤·nl¢·r JIl`l‘Jl cannot lu·
.a:z:snm¤·<| il p_|J_o·1_gl. llll l¤·r¢·n<·4·:» |»¢·Iw•·¤·n the mounlnln lnlml>ll11nI°:; no! Ionc:
ol (`Ulllllllllllly I>oundz1rics and those which pn·odu<·ed the center areas have :1
tremendous effect on cooperation. lf a group does not conceive of
itself as a single unit, it will not participate as such in a cooperative
program.
The potential acceptor's understanding of the purposes of the Com-
munity Action Program is essential to successful cooperation and
participation. However, certain misconceptions about the program
have developed in the mountain neighborhood, largely because of problems
of communication between its inhabitants and those of the outside world.
Such problems must be resolved, if misconceptions are to be corrected.
Conclusion
No matter how beneficial an innovation is for the recipient society,
chances for acceptance will increase only in proportion to the amount
of energy the change agent expends in adapting his methods to the culture
of the potential acceptor. Such adjustment requires an understanding
of that culture; the data presented in the description of a Knox County
mountain neighborhood provide the basic information necessary to such
an understanding.
ia
I

 O
Ackrmwl0dgc·mc·nts
'|`h¢- rusat-:1r<,·l¤t·r wishes Lo a-xprvsec his )'_l'·'|LllII(_ll‘ to Lh<,· people of
Wi|.m:1n for their cooperation throughout Lhu course of the- research.
An anthropological study is a trying experience for the people as wel]
as for the anthropologist. Awareness that one is being studied is, at
the least, an uncomfortable feeling. The people withstood the strain
quite well.
The researcher is further indebted to Art Callaher, Jr., Deputy
Director of the Center for Developmental Change at the University of
Kentucky, whose advice and guidance helped to ease the problems that
arose during thc study.
l

 TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Introduction ......................... I-7
Chapters
1- Out-Migration ..................... 8-11
111. Self-Image ...................... 12-I7
111. Suspicion ...................... 18-22
1V. Interpersonal Relations ................ 23-42
V. Kinship ........................ 43-60
V1. Political Influence .................. 6l-64
VII. The Center Area as Community ............. 65-67
VIII. Misconceptions and Complaints ............. 68-74
Conclusion .......................... 75-79
Appendix A .......................... 80-81
Appendix B .......................... 82-83
Bibliography ......................... 8Q-87

 O
INTRODUCTION
The interaction that occurs between the inhabitants of southern
Appalachia and the change agents* of the larger society whenever a
program such as the Community Action Program is introduced is neces-
sarily of a cross—cuitural nature. This interaction necessitates
cross—cultura| understanding on the part of the change agent. A lack
of understanding can result in a program that by its very nature is
_ doomed to failure in the cultural milieu of the potential acceptors
of such programs.
In order to provide a description of mountain life as it is found
in Knox County, a researcher lived in a neighborhood for six months and
conducted an anthropological study of the culture. The neighborhood is
located in the mountainous region of Knox County, not far from Barbourville,
the county seat. Chosen because of its remoteness, the neighborhood
exhibits maximum cultural differences between its inhabitants and the
outside world. it was felt that this kind of situation offered the
best opportunity for understanding the problems involved in gaining
acceptance of community action programs. Neighborhoods such as the one
reported on here do, in fact, represent the areas of greatest need in
southern Appalachia.
*The term change agent is used here to refer to those officials of
the federal, state, and local governments and to the non government
officials who have the responsibility for introducing such innovations
as the Community Action Program into southern Appalachian society.
· Recipients of these innovations are potential acceptors.
l

 2
· Participant Observation
The method of study was participant-observation. This involves
residence in the community studied and participation, whenever possible,
in the on-going culture. lu a discussion of this methodology Nicholas
Habchuk distinguishes between participant observer and participant-as-
observer (l9b2:22U-228). The former refers to one who lives within a
study area and participates in the culture without revealing his desire
to study it. He assumes an already existing role in the society. The
latter refers to the scholar who reveals his purposes to the group he
is studying and then participates in the day to day activities of the
group. He brings his observer role with him to the field. For the
following reasons it was decided that the data for this phase of the
evaluation could be derived best if the researcher was a participant-
as-observer:
l. The nature of the culture of this area is such that a
stranger can not move into a neighborhood and assume
a preexisting role without drawing attention to him-
self. Since the field study was to be only a few
months long, time was insufficient to establish such
a role.
2. The great amount of activity in Knox County that is
the result of authorities external to the local culture
makes any new person recognized as not familiar with
the culture suspect. For that reason it would be impos-
sible to assume a role as a member of the neighborhood.
3. The role of known observer participating in the society
allows vreater freedom to stud the culture than is the
A Y
case when the observer role is concealed. Such freedom
involves movement through time and space and access to
all status levels in the culture.
4. The participant—as-observer can use more research
techniques than can a participant observer. For example,
one who conceals his role is unable to use the formal
interview.

 3
Ihe_Study Qrga
O
` The area ol study, hencelorth known as Wilman, is a small neighbor—
hood that is part ol a larger area served hy a community center. The
community center area is part of a larger area henceforth called Muddy
Road. Both wilman and Muddy Road are fictitious names. Wilman was
selected as the area of study for several reasons. Firstly, it is in
a remote section of Knox County; therefore, the people have been less
exposed to the outside world than those who live closer to Barbourville.
Secondly, although the inhabitants of Wilman do not think of themselves
as a formal community, there are natural conditions, nevertheless, that
set them off from other households to such an extent that neighborhood
boundaries can be drawn for study purposes. Thirdly, the director of
the OEO Community Center that serves Wilman was willing to have such a
study conducted and to provide the necessary cooperation for entry into
the neighborhood. Lastly,based on demographic and other data, it was
believed that the culture of Wilman could be generalized to other moun-
tain neighborhoods in the area.
Wilman comprises twenty-one households and three small grocery
stores. The stores sell a few canned goods, breads, pastries and other
sweets. The store owners have to pay more for their goods than customers
n pay in the chain grocery stores in liarbourville. One advantage of these
small stores for consumers is that they are close by. Another is that
they extend credit without interest. Still, storekeepers in Wilman do
little better than break even.
  —

 4
· The most remote house relative to others in the neighborhood is
approximately a quarter of a mile from any other. This distance is
llIll(|II1‘; n|<¤:—;l of ll1<· l1<¤···:;»: ol
fQ3Q’(),U()(). .lu:;l ahoul every l1ou:;<·l»<¤|