People Nostalgic for Misery?
I was reading an article about photos of New York City's East Village in the 1980s. Describing this filthy, run-down, disgusting neighborhood rings a bell with me because we attend Mass at a church down there from time to time. So I was there on and off during the period captured by these photos and know what's being described here. At the time, the neighborhood was filled with misery.
While the neighborhood's not as devastated as it once was, it's still pretty filthy, and I'd say still pretty disgusting, despite its relative "gentrification" what with higher rents and NYU's ubiquitous expanding presence in the entire Village area of the city. It's just that now there are dozens of restaurants and bars - some of high quality - enough NYU students, tourists and other gawkers such that you don't notice the still-present low-lifes who crawl around the place.
(We still attend Mass at that church from time to time, and the biggest change around the church is the absence of drug addicts and assorted bums lying on the sidewalk.)
From an economic point of view, the East Village shows us how long-term economic cycles effect neighborhoods. The 1960s, most especially the 1970s, saw the City of New York at its most sketchy, edgy and dangerous. The great growth cycle that began after World War II had stalled by the late 1960s, as the federal government spent money it didn't have on the War in Vietnam and the social welfare programs of the so-called Great Society of LBJ. Then the U.S. experienced a bout with high inflation that grew during the 1970s and exploded at the end of the decade, wiping out the value of people's dollars - in some cases, money saved through decades of hard work. While the war eventually ended and the inflation subsided in the early 1980s, the effects on the City lasted well into the 1990s.
Now, having somewhat recovered, the City isn't as edgy, sketchy, or dangerous, the result of a credit-induced economic boom that started in the 1980s and - despite the stock market debacle of 2000-2001-2002, the attack on 9/11, and the financial crisis of 2008 - more or less continues, albeit at a much tamer level. The benefits derived from the prosperity of those decades manifested themselves in high-paying financial sector jobs, skyrocketing real estate values, rents that pushed the middle class out of Manhattan, and tourism that inebriates the city 24/7, 365 days of the year, bringing millions into the coffers of those who cater to it, for example Broadway plays, double-decker buses, luxury goods stores and trinket-sellers alike.
Now, setting aside for the moment the fact that the economic boom was mostly credit-driven, and remains alive because the majority of Americans' pocketbooks have bled out after spending themselves dry and running up huge debt, the fact is the city isn't the desolate, desperate, dangerous place it was back in the day. On the face of it, you might imagine that a reasonable person would consider this an improvement. Despite all the noise about how the rich have gotten richer and the middle class has been gutted, things really do seem a cut above those forlorn 60s, 70s, and 80s,...right?
Well, apparently not for some people. It seems the misery of those times hasn't stopped some from seeing those decades of despair as "the good old days":
I used to think that it was an exaggeration to say that when you get older you look at the past as "the good old days" no matter how awful those days really were. Mark C has proved me wrong. Mark, really, on balance, in the greater scheme of things, do you really pine for the "old" East Village scene? Really?
While the neighborhood's not as devastated as it once was, it's still pretty filthy, and I'd say still pretty disgusting, despite its relative "gentrification" what with higher rents and NYU's ubiquitous expanding presence in the entire Village area of the city. It's just that now there are dozens of restaurants and bars - some of high quality - enough NYU students, tourists and other gawkers such that you don't notice the still-present low-lifes who crawl around the place.
(We still attend Mass at that church from time to time, and the biggest change around the church is the absence of drug addicts and assorted bums lying on the sidewalk.)
From an economic point of view, the East Village shows us how long-term economic cycles effect neighborhoods. The 1960s, most especially the 1970s, saw the City of New York at its most sketchy, edgy and dangerous. The great growth cycle that began after World War II had stalled by the late 1960s, as the federal government spent money it didn't have on the War in Vietnam and the social welfare programs of the so-called Great Society of LBJ. Then the U.S. experienced a bout with high inflation that grew during the 1970s and exploded at the end of the decade, wiping out the value of people's dollars - in some cases, money saved through decades of hard work. While the war eventually ended and the inflation subsided in the early 1980s, the effects on the City lasted well into the 1990s.
Now, having somewhat recovered, the City isn't as edgy, sketchy, or dangerous, the result of a credit-induced economic boom that started in the 1980s and - despite the stock market debacle of 2000-2001-2002, the attack on 9/11, and the financial crisis of 2008 - more or less continues, albeit at a much tamer level. The benefits derived from the prosperity of those decades manifested themselves in high-paying financial sector jobs, skyrocketing real estate values, rents that pushed the middle class out of Manhattan, and tourism that inebriates the city 24/7, 365 days of the year, bringing millions into the coffers of those who cater to it, for example Broadway plays, double-decker buses, luxury goods stores and trinket-sellers alike.
Now, setting aside for the moment the fact that the economic boom was mostly credit-driven, and remains alive because the majority of Americans' pocketbooks have bled out after spending themselves dry and running up huge debt, the fact is the city isn't the desolate, desperate, dangerous place it was back in the day. On the face of it, you might imagine that a reasonable person would consider this an improvement. Despite all the noise about how the rich have gotten richer and the middle class has been gutted, things really do seem a cut above those forlorn 60s, 70s, and 80s,...right?
Well, apparently not for some people. It seems the misery of those times hasn't stopped some from seeing those decades of despair as "the good old days":
“It was bombed-out with abandoned cars on the streets, but it was an image of creativity and endless possibility,” said Mark C, whose art-rock band Live Skull features in a trailer video for the “Invisible City” reissue. “You could make noise, spray-paint, take over an abandoned building and make a club to have all-night dance parties. Ken’s pictures remind me of all of that.”Maybe Mark never grew up. Maybe his "art" skews his judgment. Or maybe he really preferred the East Village as it once was. I can tell you that any reduction in filth (slight), disgusting smells (barely), and low-lifes (lost amidst the crowds, but still there) is welcome on my end. Then again, I don't play in an "art-rock" band.
I used to think that it was an exaggeration to say that when you get older you look at the past as "the good old days" no matter how awful those days really were. Mark C has proved me wrong. Mark, really, on balance, in the greater scheme of things, do you really pine for the "old" East Village scene? Really?
Comments