Civil War Silliness
We got several e-mails from readers yesterday wondering why we hadn’t done a post on the Observer article that tries to bifurcate gentrified Brooklyn: cynical hipsters to the North, yuppie stroller-pushers to the South. As silly as they can be, when a publication like New York Magazine writes these kinds of articles, they usually hit…
We got several e-mails from readers yesterday wondering why we hadn’t done a post on the Observer article that tries to bifurcate gentrified Brooklyn: cynical hipsters to the North, yuppie stroller-pushers to the South. As silly as they can be, when a publication like New York Magazine writes these kinds of articles, they usually hit some kind of nerve; this Observer piece was pretty pointless, we thought:
Of course, all of gentrified Brooklyn is somewhat similar. It’s mostly white. It’s mostly partial to some form of indie rock. Refugees from small colleges like Vassar and Wesleyan may trudge North; shiny Ivy Leaguers could prefer the South—but the bottom line is that they all attended fancy colleges. Southerners reluctantly fork over deceptively low salaries for DVF dresses and Paper, Denim, Whatever jeans; Northern chicks would rather jump off the Williamsburg Bridge than wear something they didn’t iron on themselves. But in the end, they all care a lot about what they wear.
As someone who’s lived on both sides of the Flushing Avenue, all we can say is, “Whatever, dude.”
Brooklyn Civil War [NY Observer]
i so agree with you b-stoner. i saw the link to it on gawker and i cringed for the embarrassment of the writer and the newspaper.
pointless and fabricated crap. and as usual, the only brooklyn that exists to these publications is the “gentrified” one.
South Brooklyn has turned into hipster Florida – it’s where they all go to retire.
Stereotypes overgeneralize, but as is often the case, there is a kernal of truth here. I thought it was humerous and nothing for us get hung up over. We know who we are.
I loved how the article noted “north” and “south” Brooklyn as if Brooklyn consisted only of Wmsbg and PS.
Uh, Coney Island anyone? Red Hook? Flatbush?
This kind of pathetic piece gives journalism a bad name. The poster above who noted that journalists talk to their friends in bars as “research” hit the nail on the head.
People, lighten up! This was all meant to entertain. Jeez. There are enough stereotypes on all sides. However, as a Park Sloper that works in North Brooklyn (South Brooklyn, I think, is Dyker Heights, right?) I can tell you that the article, although a humor piece, is kind of dead on.
hey, c’mon, it’s a littttttle bit true…although I do agree with previous poster who said that it sounds more like 10 years ago.
re public schools in billsburg, I know alot of parents there, post-hipsters, if you will, who are working hard for better schools
Writers are generally lazy. Generally, they interview their best buds since high school, or their favorite bartender. And they’re generally, on average, fearful little wallflowers who timidly take notes on other people’s sources of excitement. On average, anyway.
Although the article is fun fluff, it ignores the underlying difference: kids. Brownstone Brooklyn has plenty of decent-to-excellent public (and private) schools. As far as I know, the Williamsburg area does not. So twenty and thirtysomethings without kids go to hipsterville, where they can stroke each others egos about how alternative they are, and people doing childrearing head to MacLaren and Bugaboo land, where they (including me) have their own self-absorbed community. If only there weren’t so many damn people who can afford Bugaboos . . .
I read this article yesterday and found it mostly annoying. But it’s interesting as part of the recent trend of journalists discovering this place across the East River called Brooklyn. I feel like a Native American to all of these Columbuses … did they think we didn’t exist before they found us?