Get Brooklynian.com by Email! 
Grab the Feed (RSS)
Very un- "sivilized".
Brooklynian » Forum » Brooklyn Politics »
-
I had a conversation recently with an acquaintance who has lived in Manhattan for the past eight years, and has always claimed that she could "never" live in any other borough. She loves Manhattan for its density, walkability, 24 hour access, and hip (read: expensive) bars and restaurants. She lamented to me that her favorite coffee shop had just started serving food since it could no longer sustain its business on just coffee drinks alone. Then, to my surprise, she said that she was thinking about moving to Fort Greene, where there were many "cool" coffee shops, as well as restaurants she liked. A few weeks before that conversation, I went to a residents' party on top of one of the newly built condo buildings in Downtown Brooklyn (adjacent to Fort Greene). Outside of the unencumbered view, I felt like I might as well have been in Manhattan. Almost everybody was white. Mostly everybody looked under 30, despite condo prices there starting at $500K for a studio. I definitely had a "I'm not in Brooklyn, anymore" feeling, even though I could look out and see the Clock Tower. Until now, even the "nice" parts of Brooklyn were perceived for a certain demographic as an option only if "more space" was desired or if kids were on the way. But these experiences have made me wonder: Is "Brooklyn" going to continue to be a destination primarily for upper/middle-class people (who, maybe, don't want to pay for food with their espresso), or is Brooklyn becoming THE destination borough for all, regardless of income?
-
can we prevent these people from moving here? i don't want them here.
-
the0ther » can we prevent these people from moving here? i don't want them here.
Which ones? ....Personally, I'd like to ban the long time residents and the newbies from living here. I'd then knock down all the buildings, and let trees grow. ...and, then, after the forest takes over, introduce a moose and wolf into it.
I predict we will each experience similar level of success.For better or worse, the change on Nostrand is going to make the change on Franklin look minor. -
Brooklyn will continue to be a place where people who want to live in Brooklyn will choose to live. There are 2+million people here. Not all of them are going to be under-30 trust fund kids living in skyscrapers.
-
Subject: Re: A new Brooklyn?
You are right. I laugh at all the 'new neighborhoods'. 20 years ago there was no ' South of Prospect Park', 'South Brooklyn', 'Hamilton Heights' ,etc, etc, etc. Back in the day, where Fairway is, you would have never stepped foot there. Now it's all 'flimboms' running around in their sandals and peroxide hair (ironic). I guess Realtors need to label to in order to sell, haha. Call it what you want, it's still Brooklyn!!!!! The same is true for Hoboken, NJ. They are having the same experience. My husband is from there, back when it was factories. We passed by to go to a Red Bulls Game, for PATH train. There are coffee shops, galleries, 'arts and crafts' and yes Cake Boss. Note that Carlo's Bakery has been there for over 100 years. They too are building Mini Sky scrapers in that area. We called it the town from the Truman show. It was almost fake and spooky.krowonhill » ..... Is "Brooklyn" going to continue to be a destination primarily for upper/middle-class people (who, maybe, don't want to pay for food with their espresso), or is Brooklyn becoming THE destination borough for all, regardless of income?
add me on facebook: http://www.facebook.com/?ref=home#!/techiediva -
HEY THERE RMPBKLYN I LIVED IN THE SAME HOOD FOR 58 YEARS BACK IN THE DAYS WHERE I LIVE IT WAS CALLED SOUTH BROOKLYN OR SOUTH PARK SLOPE I LIVE IN THE 20S BETWEEN 3---7 AVES MY DAD OWNED A CANDY STORE ON 21 STREET 6 AVE.
-
Subject: Re: A new Brooklyn?
krowonhill » Is "Brooklyn" going to continue to be a destination primarily for upper/middle-class people (who, maybe, don't want to pay for food with their espresso), or is Brooklyn becoming THE destination borough for all, regardless of income?
If you've been here long enough you'd know that "Brooklyn" is hardly a single entity. People move to Williamsburg for specific reasons and Park Slope for other ones. I don't know if someone moves to Brooklyn to simply be in Brooklyn. -
modsquad2.0 » If you've been here long enough you'd know that "Brooklyn" is hardly a single entity. People move to Williamsburg for specific reasons and Park Slope for other ones. I don't know if someone moves to Brooklyn to simply be in Brooklyn.
While people who live in Brooklyn refer to their own neighborhoods as a point of reference, I hear people who don't live here constantly refer to a monolithic "Brooklyn". By this, wealthy New Yorkers usually mean the neighborhoods that are on the radar of the NYTimes, whether Williamsburg or Park Slope or, more recently, Bushwick and Prospect Heights. The list of neighborhoods in Brooklyn that the NYTimes covers just continues to grow. I see the types that I described as the more economically-advanced troops of gentrification than the ones who came before. The people at the party I found myself at, like my acquaintance, were not trust fund kids. They were graduate-educated professionals who pursued careers in areas that would leave them as financially-comfortable as possible (law, consulting, medicine, pharmacy, etc.). Their parents may have "helped them" with the down payment on their new condo, but these were the kind of people who were capable of making the monthly mortgage by themselves. My acquaintance is not going to be moving into Crown Heights any time soon. But in the few, short years that I've lived near it, Franklin Ave. has become inundated with what the now demised MHA insightfully termed "the gentry," i.e. primarily white middle-class professionals who are clamoring for the kind of cafes and restaurants that they are used to. My impression is that most of these people would live in a more "desirable" Brooklyn neighborhood if they could afford to. The same rapid gentrification is going on in Fort Greene, Bed Sty, Flatbush, Windsor Terrace, and Ditmas Park. Meanwhile, the Upper East Side is now touted by real estate rental agents as "more affordable" than Park Slope. In our hyper-capitalist City, rich people determine so much of what goes on. Will there be a point in the future when people who could afford to live anywhere will en mass choose to live in Brooklyn? And, what would the repercussions of that be?Very un- "sivilized". -
krowonhill » Meanwhile, the Upper East Side is now touted by real estate rental agents as "more affordable" than Park Slope. In our hyper-capitalist City, rich people determine so much of what goes on. Will there be a point in the future when people who could afford to live anywhere will en mass choose to live in Brooklyn? And, what would the repercussions of that be?
If Brooklyn remains an "American" city then it's chances of becoming a "destination" in and of itself would be limited. Manhattan prices are driven by foreigners in times of US economic slump which usually allow it to recover faster. There is certainly a smattering of foreign students residing in some of the hotter neighborhoods in Brooklyn but until truckloads of Asians or Europeans invade 7th Avenue Brooklyn will be nothing more then a quirky and sometimes expensive bedroom community. And let's face it. the only reason people can afford to buy big in Brooklyn is because they work in Manhattan. Always, always follow the money. -
I know it’s been suggested by some that I’m witless idealist when it comes to race relations and such, so I’m taking a straight-faced and sober approach this time to the likely repercussions of Krowonhill’s postulate: 1. Brooklyn will become increasingly full of rich white people and coffeeshops 2. Non-gentry will continue to be pushed out towards the less-accessible edges of the borough 3. Repeat (1) and (2) 4. Repeat (3) 5. Repeat (4) 5(a) Manhattan will fall off radar of the New York Times. 6. By (5), most non-gentry will be living on rafts floating in the water off Coney Island and swimming to work 7. Hipsters will become jealous of "raft people" and start taking over the rafts, or building their own rafts out of reclaimed and "sustainable" material from the now-abandoned Upper East Side. 8. In the meantime, "affordable" rafts will move further and out to sea. 8(a) Non-gentry will develop flippers, gills, and other evolutionarily adaptive traits to make their commute to work easier. 8(b) The UES will be taken back by moose and wolves. 9. Hipsters on the first set of rafts will be eclipsed by stroller moms. McLaren will develop a amphibious stroller specifically for Brooklyn raft-community market. 9(a) Hipsters, seeking adventure and edginess, will move out further into raft territory, displacing the non-gentry yet again. 10. In one of those evolutionary leaps made famous by the late Stephen Jay Gould's theory of punctuated equilibrium, non-gentry will develop into superhuman species capable of surviving underwater and on land. 11. They will go to the UES and battle the wolves and moose. 12. After making a treaty with the wolves and moose, they will build out of the rubble a new community of peace, love and understanding, in harmony with the environment. 13. They will save the whales. 13(a) Whales will recognize them as their natural leaders and adorn them with crowns of gold. 14. Colonial expansion will drive the new super-species into Brooklyn, where it will conquer remaining humans. At first, Brooklyn will be the kind of outpost/inconvenient slum that no one but the poorest fishperson wants to live in. 15. Eventually, Manhattan will become crowded and only the wealthiest fishpeople will be able to live there. Portions of Brooklyn near Manhattan will see an influx of young fishpeople seeking more affordable krill, or just the excitement of living in a slum. 16. More, and wealthier, fishpeople will follow. Brooklyn will become a desirable place for young fishpeople to raise their tadpoles. Amphibious Montessori and Waldof schools will proliferate. 17. As time passes, Brooklyn will become increasingly full of rich fishpeople and krillshops. 18. Less wealthy fishpeople will be pushed further into the less-accessible parts of the borough, and all former gentry (i.e. “humans”) will live on rafts. 19. Repeat (17) and (18), until former gentry has completely taken over raft community. 19(a). Global warming, meanwhile, will continue to melt the ice caps, desalinizing the water the fishpeople and their subjects, the whales, rely on. Water levels will rise and the city will become submerged. The moose and wolves will drown. 20. Only raft-based civilizations will survive. 21. Meaning that the only creatures left where Brooklyn once was will be hipsters and stroller moms, who will live on rafts and sip coffee unto eternity.Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better.
-
I like the part about the moose and the wolves. Everything else seems sorta far fetched to me, except for the rafts. .... I must say I looked for a psychadelic mushrooms reference and did not see one. Clearly, you are aware that the Internet is monitored, and are being discreet. P.S those maclaren people are geniuses! I gotta buy stock in that.For better or worse, the change on Nostrand is going to make the change on Franklin look minor.
-
Are there any stores in Prospect Heights or Crown Heights that sell psychedelic mushrooms? I hear that they are a good source of fiber.
-
modsquad: I was thinking about how interesting it is that you referred to Park Slope as a "bedroom community" for Manhattan. Follow the money - yes. Brooklyn still had its own thriving industries 50 years ago, such as manufacturing and shipbuilding. I imagine in the 1950s and 1960s there were men commuting to Brooklyn from new developments in Long Island, originally the local "bedroom communities". I wonder how dependent the borough was on Manhattan back then? At all dependent? Your point about foreigners buying up real estate in Manhattan is interesting, but I'm hoping you can clear something up for me: my understanding is that the wealthy foreigners buying buildings in Manhattan keep them as investment properties but don't live in the City (or even visit much, especially if they're Arab). In which case, they wouldn't be contributing to the local economy, except to drive real estate prices up Which would only send the less wealthy - pretty much everybody else - into Long Island City and downtown Brooklyn. But are you thinking of another group of foreigners? It's also pretty new that anyone would say (like I did) that what goes on in New York City depends on what rich people do. For most of the last century, unions and labour were the largest influence on New York City politics, and almost all the City's mayors were Democrats. The working class was in charge, through their numbers and their votes. A lot of what looks like change to us (skyscrapers in downtown Brooklyn, Ivy-league educated white people living on Franklin Ave., Park Slope as a "bedroom community,") would have been unthinkable for a lot of individuals at times in our borough's development. I think it's worth asking what we might see in the future for Brooklyn that now seems unthinkable to us?Very un- "sivilized".
-
Krowonhill, despite Inelson's attempt at perverting your intent here, I think what she says in her first three points is true. Whitefolks with money are going to buy out Black Brooklyn.It's happening already. As I make my morning walk to Franklin Avenue, I see white dudes sitting in cars with computers mounted to dashboards punching in addresses and making attempt to determine ownership of real estate. With the gentry comes the cops, forced to do the dictates of rich whitefolks. That has always been the way it is. I recall on a trip to France thinking about Brooklyn. Only the rich motherfuckers live near the museums, you know? I couldn't help but think about Crown Heights, and how the neighborhood is for a rude awakening; real rude. I saw a white dude with a VOLVO asking his Black girlfriend where the liquor store is. He was on St. Mark's place!!! Oy. I hope for history's sake, we go noisily.
-
When I worked in Harlem in the late 90's, the first wave of gentrifiers was black ...and with them came the police. I attended an awesome community meeting wherein a woman lamented about how all this time she thought she had been left without police protection because of her race, but now perceived it was because her and her longtime neighbors did not organize, vote, or have money. However, she was just as angry. --For better or worse: Unless you are under some type of rent control or Section 8, nothing stops gentrification. ---For better or worse, the change on Nostrand is going to make the change on Franklin look minor.
-
For the record, I see this as a question of economics. Apparently, Inelson's spurious post was spawned out of the connection she made between gentrification and race (and because she feels race is talked about too much on the Brooklynian). MHA's post followed hers in this vein. Yes, of course, this question includes racial issues especially since right now it is primarily black neighborhoods which are effected by gentrification. However, there are many working and middle-class white people in Brooklyn (including Eastern European immigrants) who may eventually be forced out by this process. And, besides those groups, I see pockets of potential resistance in the Orthodox Jewish community (speaking of separatists). To MHA's point, I think that a demographic map of NYC will end up looking similar to Paris. The city will consist of a core of wealthy, primarily white people, ringed by a mass of poor, primarily non-white people. It won't include much of a middle-class. I wonder how much of Brooklyn will be set within the inner core. I'd guess a lot. Certainly given what is already taking place, Crown Heights will be. But I think that it's possible that East NY and Brownsville - so poor for so long - will be more resistant (much like the Tenderloin in San Francisco). I'd guess the whole process will be pretty much over within 20 years.Very un- "sivilized".
-
Hasn't Brooklyn always been ever changing?...not that there's anything wrong with that.
-
WhyFi » Hasn't Brooklyn always been ever changing?
Of course, and it has yet to take the form of Paris. For better or worse, someday it might, but it hasn't so far.novanglus » Brooklyn will continue to be a place where people who want to live in Brooklyn will choose to live. There are 2+million people here. Not all of them are going to be under-30 trust fund kids living in skyscrapers.
These folks will soon appear at BAM and say it pretty well. http://www.bam.org/view.aspx?pid=2230 (just be aware when you click, it automatically plays). P.S. I apologize in advance for the woman saying it is "organic". The word has become so cliche, that I now hate it any context. It is like fingernails on a chalkboard to me, but the other 99.9% off this clip is worth watching.For better or worse, the change on Nostrand is going to make the change on Franklin look minor. -
WhyFi » Hasn't Brooklyn always been ever changing?
It seems so. What's astounding to me is how fast it's changing. In just a few years, the demographics of Franklin Ave. have gone from almost exclusively black to practically half black/half white. On this board, there is often a sentiment of "well, that's how it goes in a capital driven economy," but in the past people have believed that social engineering could make a difference in how gentrification played out. Certainly, the point of Jane Jacobs' famous tome, "Death & Life of Great American Cities," was to encourage the kind of social mechanisms that would result in neighborhoods that were socioeconomically mixed.Very un- "sivilized". -
Jane has some followers, and we recently discussed her ideas at some length: http://www.brooklynian.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=55712&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0 For those of you who don't like to click, here is what I consider to be an objective summary of Jane's perspective, and her followers:
Place matters. History matters more. Who we are today is a product of the past. The development process presents a profound story: one that embodies the dynamic relationship between people and place, physically manifested within the environment in which we live. It is through this process that change occurs, driving the creation and expression of new forms of socio-cultural structures and identities. How to manage this process of change, particularly within complex and diverse urban networks, presents a great challenge—or opportunity—for the future wellbeing of society.
If I may say so, that is a damn good summary. It uses the language of her followers and everything. (Note to readers: the following sentence is to be said in the voice of Cheech and Chong) "Dude, it's like Whynot was there at last night's event. Whoa": http://www.demos.org/event_list.cfm?currenteventid=5D5BE44E%2D3FF4%2D6C82%2D557D13D17A7230A0 Ok, I am now returning to my normal writing style and intonation. It is time for the critique.... While I have no inherent love of the "free market", I will discuss Jane's efforts in these terms, because they are so succinct. Jane basically argued (she is now deceased...) that the market for housing should be distorted. She would likely support and expand the modern incarnations of rent control, rent stabilization, Section 8, NYCHA and the welfare state (known to its fans as the "safety net"). As noted above, Jane and her followers assign an inherent worth to such distortions, and the economically and racially diverse neighborhoods that result. Others argue that if low wage professionals need to be dispersed throughout the city, the market needs to pay them more. ....and, if left alone, the market will find a way to do so. A third group, well represented here on this message board, seems to simply observe that (for better or worse) the city does change, has always changed, and will always change. Speaking on behalf of myself, I choose to simply try to keep up with the changes, and leave any freting and navel gazing on this issue to others. However, I sincerely hope this stand will allow me to see the "Change is constant" show at BAM (linked above), because I've bought tickets. As stated above, my only hope is the woman in the clip doesn't say "organic" over and over in the show.For better or worse, the change on Nostrand is going to make the change on Franklin look minor. -
Gentrification affects people regardless of race. When I moved to Park Slope in '76, the people being displaced were primarily Irish or Italian. I imagine quite a few people of Eastern European descent have more recently been displaced in Williamsburg and Greenpoint.
Welcome! Please log in to post, or register a new account!