Here's another passage:
Every pioneer that has passed through Lower Manhattan has no doubt felt that their time there was the Golden Age. There were the Dutch and then the English and Irish. And, even before them, the Indians who smoked tobacco pipes on wooded paths. I’m sure my great-grandmother, who made an extended pit stop there between Ellis Island and Jersey City, thought the neighborhood had lost its edge back in the ’90s — the 1890s. “Posers,” I can hear her say in Southern Italian dialect. “Imposters.”
[Photo — Nancy Siesel/The New York Times]
2 comments:
This is a variation of the often heard "you are just complaining about change! New York changes all the time! That is what makes the city great!" argument. Its a stupid argument. Probably even more stupid that the similar "you are just getting old!" argument.
Change is neutral. Things can change for the worse or for the better. Culturally, things have changed for the worse in New York since 2001. Its simply a less interesting and less fun city where nothing worthwile is created. This is definitely a change, but just the fact that its a change doesnt mean its something to celebrate or acccept.
Also, you can take this to the point of absurdity. If change was so constant that businesses could only remain open one week, the city would be completely unlivable.
"Its simply a less interesting and less fun city where nothing worthwile is created."
Prodigal Son, this is an incredibly presumptuous and ridiculous statement.
And "worthwile" has another h in it.
Post a Comment