Boston and New York: a tale of two cities

[czsz]

Since Boston's inferiority complex toward New York is a frequent discussion topic here, I thought I'd use this column to funnel discussion into its own topic:

A new twist on a tale of two cities
By Alex Beam | July 24, 2007

NEW YORK -- God knows I have written my share of set-piece, New York-bashing columns over the years. I've made fun of the city's ad campaigns, of its brief but ridiculous claim to have become a "polite" city, and I wrote a parody of the local newspaper's fill-in-the-blank contest, "You Know You're a New Yorker When. . ."

You know you're a New Yorker when you can successfully repress the fact that your mayor is from Medford and your most famous senator is from Chicago.

But now there is a problem. My wife works here. Yes, that's a good pick up line in Boston, until I get to the part about us still being married. She got a nice apartment. But I still live in Massachusetts, raising the next generation. So I am a curious miscegenation still looking for a name, a Bostonyorker, pronounced Boss-stony-yorker.

It's been quite a transformation. When I exit the subway station here, I know which direction is uptown. I'm not sure how, maybe they implanted a chip in my shoulder. I know The New York Times crossword does not appear in section B down here -- that's the Metro section. I already had the rudeness and "in your face" thing down. I didn't have to attend the reverse charm school required of all Gothamites.

I've finally stopped buying $6 boxes of Smart Start at convenience stores, and have discovered the Fairway supermarket over on 126th, underneath the Henry Hudson Parkway. I bet there are Costco stores over in New Jersey, wherever that is. The next thing you know I'll start complaining about bagels in Boston, and gassing on about how Rubin's in Brookline isn't "real" deli.

I am even learning the parking quadrille. When visiting, I know I have to leave the apartment right after lunch to move the car from the Monday-Thursday side of the street to the Tuesday-Friday side. It's the summer, and the parking is easy. In the fall, I may go back to taking the bus.

Don't get me started about "Law & Order." The TV show routinely closes off parking for several blocks, and puts up cardboard signs, generally hidden behind trees or lampposts, "informing" you of the restrictions. They ticketed me on a visit last year, and I wrote a groveling letter to the New York cops, explaining 1) I was an idiot, 2) I was from Boston (redundant), and 3) I loved the show and really missed Jerry Orbach. The ticket went away. But that was before my wife moved here. Now what can I say?

I do try to hold up our side. In May, some friends invited me to get up at 5 a.m. for what they called "the best bird-watching in America" -- warbler season in Central Park. "What about Mount Auburn Cemetery?," I quickly countered. My hosts guffawed. "What's that, five acres?" Well no, more like 175, but it is indeed a postage stamp compared to Central Park. And frankly, New York may have been the best bird-watching in the country. We saw the blackpoll, the Blackburnian, and the parula. These little fellas may make it to Mount Auburn, or they might just fly right on to Montreal. But they are regulars in Central Park.

It is true that New Yorkers hold themselves above us, when they bother to think about us at all. Dan Shaughnessy noticed that Tom Brady sporting a New York Yankees cap, a la Hillary Clinton, made front-page news in Boston. Nary a peep in New York. Perhaps you saw the "Top Ten Unknown Facts About Derek Jeter," which aired on the David Letterman show. Facing the camera, the Yankees shortstop, pitchman, and deity-at-large, said, "When Red Sox fans shout, 'Yankees [expletive],' it really hurts my feelings." But you know what? He was kidding. He couldn't care less.

In the opening pages of Anthony Burgess's novel "Napoleon Symphony," he writes that his French wife could never understand why the British would name a huge, central railroad station after a military defeat, i.e. Waterloo. And that is one thing I still can't understand in New York. Yankee victories are hailed as, well, victories, and Red Sox defeats are dismissed as just deserts .

It's an upside-down world, and it's going to take some getting used to.

 

[statler]

Again, comparing Boston and New York is pointless.
New York can only be fairly compared to London & Tokyo.
Boston can be compared (favorably, I think) to cities like Philly, San Fran, Dallas et al. Maybe even Chicago and LA.
But New York is just a completely different beast. About the only thing that makes them both 'cities' is that they both have a mayor.
That's not to say we can't learn a lot from NYC (and vise versa) but they will never, ever be comparable. Ever.

 

[czsz]

That's not to say we can't learn a lot from NYC (and vise versa)

...which is exactly the point. Let's aim high. Comparing the two is a method of criticism which allows Boston to assess its inadequacies and work toward remedies. Even if it'll never reach New York's level of, say, cultural prominence again, that sort of achievement is at least worth aspiring to.

And it's not as if Boston can't meet or excel New York in certain areas. The orchestras here are at least the equal of New York's, for example. And it was only in the late 19th century (when Boston was already a much smaller city) that New York stole away Boston's prominence in finance and intellectual culture. This city could probably achieve quite a bit again if it could only evict the middling, provincial mentality that so often seems to keep it down.

 

[Beton Brut]

That's not to say we can't learn a lot from NYC (and vise versa)...This city could probably achieve quite a bit again if it could only evict the middling, provincial mentality that so often seems to keep it down.

One of our issues is the stagnant, polluted "talent pond" ("We have a pool and a pond -- the pond would be good for you") that our elected officials crawl out of. In my own neighborhood, I honestly think our pols only got into politics because they weren't smart enough for organized crime.

 

[vanshnookenraggen]

I think people need to stop kidding themselves and realize that these two cities are just neighborhoods in a vast megalopolan region. They each have their pro's and con's, their similarities and differences, but once we figure out that the two are intertwined economically, socially, historically, etc, then we can stop feeling so sorry for ourselves and just be happy. I always had a feeling that Boston was so elitist because it was a defense mechanism for dealing with how it always felt inadequate next to New York. New York works because no one gives a shit what anyone thinks about it.

 

[czsz]

I don't understand where this "New York doesn't have anxieties" mentality comes from. New York is freaked that London is overtaking it as a financial center. New York is trying to imitate the same city's congestion pricing. It always flinches when the subway is compared unfavorably to DC's (talking proudly about grit only until another 80 year old signal explodes and shuts down five lines at once). Until about ten years ago, most people would consider those who moved into the city (outside certain choice neighborhoods) to be mad, or craving a death wish.

Much of Boston's overconfidence derives from this period - approx. 1970-1999 - when most people would consider it a superior alternative to New York because it was safer, more "liveable", or what have you. Boston needs to stop having a hangover from this period - you can see it in the blase architecture alone - and realize how much it would improve if it just tried to chase New York, even if it may be impossible to catch up. The Charlie Card system is a great example of just this sort of improvement. The eastern seaboard cities are as well-endowed as they are, in many respects, because they've always - at least until recently - been in competition as much as cooperation. I would hate to see Boston rest on its laurels as a suburb of the "Megalopolis" - and decline into the comfortable yet mediocre state of a Baltimore or Philadelphia, which are superficially prospering due to gentrification but decreasingly significant culturally and economically every day as they become bedroom and back-office outposts of New York and DC.

 

[statler]

I always had a feeling that Boston was so elitist because it was a defense mechanism for dealing with how it always felt inadequate next to New York.

Boston's elitism goes back to it's founding days. ("City Upon A Hill" and all that..)
Boston was supposedly founded on the premise of becoming a moral/cultural utopia. The economic base was supposedly built around it to support that goal. (Not what actually happened, but that was the original idea.)
NYC was established as a trading post. The cultural stuff was a by-product of their success.
The Boston/NY thing didn't really start till the 1800's when NY start to catch up to Boston. It didn't reach popular conscious till the Yankees/Red Sox.
Boston was building 'elitist' cultural amenities and institutions (Harvard, MIT BPL, BSO) long before it gave a rat's ass about NY.
But yeah, modern Boston is waay to concerned with NYC (although I blame the Sox/Yankees for a lot of that) but our elitism has nothing to do with it -we just use it as a useful tool/crutch: "Yeah, you might be all rich and beautiful and maybe all the cool kids like you, but we're wicked smaht."

 

[czsz]

"Yeah, you might be all rich and beautiful and maybe all the cool kids like you, but we're wicked smaht."

Speaking of which, I wonder to what degree the decline, in some respects, of the city's cultural richness is a result of the direction academia in Boston has taken recently. Certainly the city is filled with intelligent people - but increasingly, they're scientists and doctors rather than artists or writers or publishers or what have you. It's an instrumentalist research culture rather than a literary/artistic intellectual one, the result of which may be that mainstream cultural tastes are better catered to, and even urbanism suffers. Scientists, who work in places like Brookhaven and Lawrence Livermore, don't seem to be the most passionate advocates for urban workspace...nor do cities really accomodate their needs very well, with subway vibrations and whiny worried neighbors and all that...hence our biotech "boom" is often deflected to safer locations in the suburbs, or produces bland regions like Kendall Square or Longwood.

 

[Beton Brut]

Certainly the city is filled with intelligent people - but increasingly, they're scientists and doctors rather than artists or writers or publishers or what have you. It's an instrumentalist research culture rather than a literary/artistic intellectual one, the result of which may be that mainstream cultural tastes are better catered to, and even urbanism suffers.

This is an interesting take on things, but it's a little too "broad-brush" from my experience. I work in service of scientific pursuits (at DFCI), and I sit on the board of a small cultural organization that performs its concerts at MIT. People in the sciences, physicians, and other researchers are prime consumers of the arts -- certainly at a higher rate than people who work in the private sector. Many of our donors and concert-goers are physicians, or work in the life-sciences.

Another example I can cite is the Longwood Symphony Orchestra -- from their webpage: "The musicians of the LSO, many of them health care professionals, represent eighteen of Boston's major medical institutions..."

The MFA hasn't exactly struggled during the "quiet phase" of their fundraising for the new wing -- I'll bet many of their members and donors are MedSci people (proximity to the LMA doesn't hurt).

If you value the arts, you'll seek out their restorative qualities throughout your life, and you'll give money toward their perpetuation. This is a value that I got from my blue-collar parents. Ask yourself: what's better for my family -- a 60" Sony Bravia, or a BSO subscription?

In my experience, people who work in academic, healthcare, or research institutions "get" this a lot better than say, someone at Fidelity or Wellington Management who wants Sox or Pats tickets from his boss.

The many varied failures of urbanism in greater Boston can be tossed at the feet of visionless politicians, their lazy and inept minions at (insert municipal or state agency here), and a convenience-addicted electorate (who demand things like drive-through windows at CVS).

 

[bosdevelopment]

did anybody else think that was an extremely poor piece of writing?

 

[vanshnookenraggen]

I did.

 

[statler]

did anybody else think that was an extremely poor piece of writing?

Well, it's Alex Beam, so it's pretty much a given.

 

[czsz]

He can be quite funny. This wasn't one of his better efforts.

To Beton: I think we all mostly agree the local political talent pool is desperately shallow. But politics can't explain, for example, the pathetic repertoire of the Theatre District, or the Atlantic Monthly's decamping for DC (of all the branches of cultural life, the letters are the least responsive to political overtures like museum or concert hall-building).

 

[Beton Brut]

...politics can't explain, for example, the pathetic repertoire of the Theatre District, or the Atlantic Monthly's decamping for DC (of all the branches of cultural life, the letters are the least responsive to political overtures like museum or concert hall-building).

All the new thinking is about loss.
In this it resembles all the old thinking.

Theatre in Boston is a disgrace -- Vegas spectacle or pretentious horse shit. I've no appetite for either (and have always preferred live music, even though I paid my way through most of grad school working at the Huntington). Outside of New York, is it better anyplace else? And if it were (in terms of quality and cost-accessibility), would Bostonians turn off their TVs and go?

As a failed novelist, the departure of the Atlantic is very disquieting, but not a surprise. The center of gravity in Boston publishing is textbooks, not fiction, and the Atlantic's focus on foreign affairs and political science (so very much to write about these days) makes DC an acceptable home. Still a terrible loss for Boston.

Boston has produced some fine writers, but they don't tend to stick around these days -- they move to LA and write sitcoms (thus keeping the Boston Theatre District in such a sad state). The ones who stay in Boston, end up working in PR and crying from time to time on their unfinished manuscript. Some blog. Some give up writing all together and drink and bitch about all of Richard Yates' novels being out of print.

 

[justin]

Speaking of which, I wonder to what degree the decline, in some respects, of the city's cultural richness is a result of the direction academia in Boston has taken recently. Certainly the city is filled with intelligent people - but increasingly, they're scientists and doctors rather than artists or writers or publishers or what have you. It's an instrumentalist research culture rather than a literary/artistic intellectual one, the result of which may be that mainstream cultural tastes are better catered to, and even urbanism suffers.

I take it you're not a scientist?

justin

 

[underground]

Boston Theater is in decline? Which old halcyon era would you like to go back to? The days of plays advertised as being, "Banned in Boston," or the days of Lady Cheyenne being Boston's most well known actress? The fact of the matter is, the great old Boston cultural institutions like the Ballet, the Symphony, and the Pops, are still around, and still as good as ever. For that matter, in recent years we have a reopened Opera House and Cutler Majestic, and, hopefully in the near future, a reopened Paramount. As for the Atlantic Monthly's move being another harbinger of our culture in decline, Edgar Allen Poe left Boston long before, and the city didn't exactly fall into the ground.

 

[Ron Newman]

how about the days when there were always at least five shows to choose from near the corner of Boylston and Tremont, and the Wilbur didn't display "FOR LEASE" on its marquee? When shows would routinely open here as "tryouts" on the way to Broadway?

Boston gets only the barest mention in this article about tryout towns.

 

[Beton Brut]

^^Thanks for posting the article, Ron.

Alas, it does nothing but support my firm belief that theatre in America is as dead as Abe Lincoln. The Little Mermaid? Legally Blond? Can Fight Club - the Musical be far off? I'll bet Trent Reznor and the guys in Tool are working on the music and lyrics as I type.

Someone needs to take a long days journey into originality and trenchant social criticism.

Where's David Mamet when you need him?

 

[underground]

Judging from this (www.boston.com/ae/theater_arts/), we're doing all right in the theater department. As for the article, interesting read, but the list of cities not named in that article is infinitely longer than the list of cities that are named. Also, didn't most of the shows around the Boylston/Tremont corner involve dancing of the exotic variety? I think there was a nice venue where the Four Seasons is, although I'm not sure they were doing, "My Fair Lady." The old Intermission was near that corner as well. Maybe it's where they discovered Angela Landsburry?

 

[statler]

Can Fight Club - the Musical be far off? I'll bet Trent Reznor and the guys in Tool are working on the music and lyrics as I type.

You say this as if it would be a bad thing. 8)