Please stop.

[chrisbrat]

People in Boston have a low desire for nice things. Crap is “character” to them.

I can't tell if you're a troll, or legitimately going through life cosplaying as a upper-class British snob.

 

[chrisbrat]

This forum is an outlier where we celebrate new improvements to our city.

The majority of people in the city prefer things as they are. New things threaten them. Nice things are “pretentious” and “elitist”. Upkeep and maintenance are “wasted money”.

A new modern cocktail bar or nightclub is a bad thing; “give me a dive bar for real people!” they’ll say.

They embrace what they would call “grit” and “reality” and “character” of the city to such an extreme that they evangelize garbage.

And beyond that, there’s just not an appetite for finer things in Boston; certainly not relative to the amount of money here, or for a city of its supposed importance.

Just in the replies to my original post, “luxury” has been scorned, along with “designer suits” and “watches”. Which is exactly the attitude I’m talking about; “who are these pretentious a-holes with their flashy things trying to take away the soul of Boston culture”, where “the soul” is a run down half-boarded up storefront with chicken wire on the windows.

Sounds like you'd be happier elsehwere. Seemingly the late 19th century, somewhere in Studham, Bedfordshire.

Don't let the Grey Poupon hit you on the way out.

 

[Bill Blass]

That’s exactly what I mean. Nice things are snobbish to people here, so we don’t have them.

 

[Stlin]

So I'd say part of this is the increasing bifurcation of society - the death of the middle class, if you will. There are still lots of very nice things, otherwise Beacon Hill and Back Bay mansions wouldn't exist. Nor would Newbury Street and it's broad selection of renowned luxury brands, art galleries and the like - for the folks that can afford them.

At the same time, the working class, middle class members of society feel like they're getting left behind - wage stagnation, increasing costs of living and housing, means that members of this demographic can't justify those luxury purchases, nor their middle range counterparts. Part of this is the march upmarket of lower tier brands, part of this is the focus on value your typical (by numbers) consumer now has.

Let's talk in terms of watches and department stores, shall we? The rich always were, and still can, walk into a boutique and purchase the new Omega they've been eying. The middle class used to be able to go to a Macy's and justify a nice Seiko or Bulova, maybe as a anniversary gift. The working poor, if they needed a watch, would pick up the cheap digital Timex at Target or Walmart. But the middle class in Boston might as well now be the working poor, when the comfortable income range is 300k+.

Now everyone who isn't the rich and still has disposable income is either shopping at a TJX or Target, discount stores that are now "upscale" and in that space the "Upper Middle" basically ceases to exist. You can see this in which department stores have survived, and which have failed or are failing. Nordstrom, Saks Fifth, Neiman Marcus, Bloomingdales are all doing reasonably well - but even they get volumes out of their Saks Off, Nordstrom Rack etc brands. On the lower end Dollar General, Walmart, Costco ... All doing great. Who isn't? Those stores who used to rely on the middle market - your big names that everyone knows because everyone used to be part of it. JC Penney, Sears, Macy's, and yes, Lord & Taylor.

Part of it is that they got squeezed by both ends of the market. Luxury went down market with the boom of outlets and the "rack/off" model. Mass market went upscale with nicer product, eliminating the competitive niche where "upper middle" used to exist. In other terms Mercedes started to make 40k CLAs, and Toyota started to make 60k Camrys. Where then, does the upscale 50k Buick go?

That said, I do think we all appreciate nice things in the public realm. No one has ever said the McKim Building is far too nice for a public building. Almost everyone has said that Boston City Hall is a terrible public building. We want new trains, freshly paved roads. Most folks would love to be able to afford an apartment in the city and those nice things being sold at Copley place - the reality just is most can't anymore. Disney is no longer a realistic middle class vacation for many, nor is living in Boston. Those who still are don't want to be pushed out, so your average folks don't want your neighborhood bar to be torn down for a luxury condo building you can't afford a soda in. When we're not asked to pay for entry, nice is nice.

 

[Bill Blass]

I think there’s a lot of truth to that. For the record, I’m exclusively a Seiko collector (low to high end).

I see the money in Boston not going to things that make life more pleasant and livable. This whole thing started from discussion about the Winthrop square fountain. Many people here think it won’t be maintained and will sit broken and deteriorate, because people don’t care, it’s “good enough”, and “why waste the money on frivolous things”. I just expanded that sentiment into a an illustration of Boston as a whole.

And the rich people here who have money don’t enjoy fancy cars, night clubs, expensive restaurants, etc. You could argue that’s a (Puritan?) virtue, and I wouldn’t disagree, but it means there’s little market for that stuff in Boston compared to other cities. Mentón and L’Espalier’s closures are evidence of that in my opinion. And no one really seemed to care, the attitude was “F those places that are for rich people anyway”.

 

[type001]

I get what you are saying, but the things people post on social media like those statements are typically hyperbole. Coupled with the fact that the majority of people who complain about these things on public forums are not the elites of the city. In other words, fund managers in Boston, NY, Chicago, SF, etc. are typically not speaking up about maintaining a fountain or lamenting that a high-end establishment is going out of business. If you visit PO Square during lunchtime and express the same concerns there, you will see the difference.

 

[gac108]

I think there’s a lot of truth to that. For the record, I’m exclusively a Seiko collector (low to high end).

I see the money in Boston not going to things that make life more pleasant and livable. This whole thing started from discussion about the Winthrop square fountain. Many people here think it won’t be maintained and will sit broken and deteriorate, because people don’t care, it’s “good enough”, and “why waste the money on frivolous things”. I just expanded that sentiment into a an illustration of Boston as a whole.

And the rich people here who have money don’t enjoy fancy cars, night clubs, expensive restaurants, etc. You could argue that’s a (Puritan?) virtue, and I wouldn’t disagree, but it means there’s little market for that stuff in Boston compared to other cities. Mentón and L’Espalier’s closures are evidence of that in my opinion. And no one really seemed to care, the attitude was “F those places that are for rich people anyway”.

Your posts have so many ridiculous, grossly exaggerated stereotypes I don't even know where to begin. The vast majority of the commenters here as well as people I speak to in real life hold none of the opinions you spew here. We do love new things as well as appreciate the quality of the old, we like height when and where it is appropriate and not to the detriment of the street-level interaction, and for those that can afford nice things, many will spend on them while others may not- just as in EVERY OTHER MAJOR CITY IN THE WORLD. When people like you keep spreading ridiculous, outdated falsehoods on social media and forums about the citizens of greater Boston, it just makes our lives and things in our city that much more difficult because we're constantly asked to prove ourselves. It's a disservice to the city and the people and serves no purpose to continually perpetuate lies. People are no different here than in any other big city- many are friendly, some are not, many are liberal, some are not, some are bigoted, most are not, some are forward-thinking and progressive, some are old-fashioned. That also describes people in NY, in Chicago, in LA, in Seattle, in London, in Paris...... Please just stop with these vast generalizations as if it applies to the majority because it certainly does not.

 

[JeffDowntown]

I think there’s a lot of truth to that. For the record, I’m exclusively a Seiko collector (low to high end).

I see the money in Boston not going to things that make life more pleasant and livable. This whole thing started from discussion about the Winthrop square fountain. Many people here think it won’t be maintained and will sit broken and deteriorate, because people don’t care, it’s “good enough”, and “why waste the money on frivolous things”. I just expanded that sentiment into a an illustration of Boston as a whole.

And the rich people here who have money don’t enjoy fancy cars, night clubs, expensive restaurants, etc. You could argue that’s a (Puritan?) virtue, and I wouldn’t disagree, but it means there’s little market for that stuff in Boston compared to other cities. Mentón and L’Espalier’s closures are evidence of that in my opinion. And no one really seemed to care, the attitude was “F those places that are for rich people anyway”.

You clearly know very little about how people spend their money in Boston.

Yes, two nouvelle cuisine restaurants closed, after decades long runs -- because tastes change.

Right now there is a surge in Omakase restaurants in Boston that are comfortable charging $200-$400 per person for tasting menus, and have reservations booked out through August. But you with your clearly provincial mindset didn't think to look there for the change.