Re: [UC] The Gordon letter and Brook book
Kyle Cassidy wrote: I'm part of this pre-existing creative, artistic, and intellectual capitol and I certainly don't feel that UCD's tried to destroy me or my funky creative vibe. don't kid yourself kyle! we all saw that photo of you in ucd's latest newsletter, and -- well, not for nothing, but you do appear as the epitome of a middle-aged bürgermeister, a tame play-along shill toasting ucd's dock street brewpub! if you ever were creative, artistic, or intellectual, that photo shows just what glenn's talking about! :-D .. UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN [aka laserbeam®] [aka ray] SERIAL LIAR. CALL FOR RATES. It is very clear on this listserve who these people are. Ray has admitted being connected to this forger. -- Tony West You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
RE: [UC] The Gordon letter and Brook book
I'm part of this pre-existing creative, artistic, and intellectual capitol and I certainly don't feel that UCD's tried to destroy me or my funky creative vibe. Of course, if your art is leaving piles of red plastic cups in front lawns along locust, one might think differently. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Glenn the list read this book to date? of our extremely diverse community and the incredible creative, artistic, and intellectual capitol the funky vibe. Even while the UCD occupation forces policies to destroy this preexisting community, Penn markets it as a funky vibe neighborhood.
Re: [UC] The Gordon letter and Brook book
Dude, here's where I draw the line with you -- insulting Cassidy. I'm aware that he can speak for himself, but he's got more creativity, artistry, and intellect in his little finger than you have in your whole body. You know, Ray, it would really help if you got out more, met the people you diss on the list, etc etc. While you're obviously a talented gallery show producer and recorder-player (and I'm sure have many other talents) on this list you're coming across more and more as a demented Gollum. -- Ross Bender http://rossbender.org/cassidy.html On 7/27/07, UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Kyle Cassidy wrote: I'm part of this pre-existing creative, artistic, and intellectual capitol and I certainly don't feel that UCD's tried to destroy me or my funky creative vibe. don't kid yourself kyle! we all saw that photo of you in ucd's latest newsletter, and -- well, not for nothing, but you do appear as the epitome of a middle-aged bürgermeister, a tame play-along shill toasting ucd's dock street brewpub! if you ever were creative, artistic, or intellectual, that photo shows just what glenn's talking about! :-D .. UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN [aka laserbeam(r)] [aka ray] SERIAL LIAR. CALL FOR RATES. It is very clear on this listserve who these people are. Ray has admitted being connected to this forger. -- Tony West You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html. -- Ross Bender http://rossbender.org
Re: [UC] The Gordon letter and Brook book
Glenn wrote: There is a very interesting letter in this week's UC Review. Mitchell. Gordon responds to Paul Levy's letter of last week and follows-up on his original opinion piece about moderately priced housing. In this letter, Gordon touches on the problems the rapid gentrification causes for the young creative class that is the proclaimed focus of Penn's marketing scheme for Philadelphia. He also cites Daniel Brook's book, The Trap, Selling Out to Stay Afloat In Winner-Take-All America. brook writes: The pace of gentrification has accelerated to the point where bohemian communities can no longer take root in major cities like new york. the greenwich village bohemia lasted for decades, soho for ten years, the east village for five, williamsburg for two. the game is over the rising cost of living in major cities snuffs out the forms of noncommercial intellectual creativity for which our most cosmopolitan metropolises have long been known. - - - - - and perhaps it's not just the 'noncommercial' intellectual creativity being snuffed out. there is an interesting, ironic detail in the gazette article about laurie olin, penn's renowned landscape architect who transforms spaces so that 'where once was abandonment, there is now vigor and gentrification' -- we learn just how he got his start, back in 1976: we scrambled around and we found some space over a bar next to a strip club opposite the old Greyhound station on Market Street. That seedy block soon became one end of a pipeline fed by Penn's Department of Landscape Architecture. Dennis McGlade GLA'69, Lucinda Sanders GLA'89, and Susan Weiler GLA'83 joined the firm in its first decade Along with Robert Bedell and David Rubin, they form the leadership of a firm that has made Olin the landscape designer of choice by some of the best architects in the world. .. UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN [aka laserbeam®] [aka ray] SERIAL LIAR. CALL FOR RATES. It is very clear on this listserve who these people are. Ray has admitted being connected to this forger. -- Tony West You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
Re: [UC] The Gordon letter and Brook book
Ross Bender wrote: Dude, here's where I draw the line with you -- insulting Cassidy. I'm aware that he can speak for himself, but he's got more creativity, artistry, and intellect in his little finger than you have in your whole body. You know, Ray, it would really help if you got out more, met the people you diss on the list, etc etc. While you're obviously a talented gallery show producer and recorder-player (and I'm sure have many other talents) on this list you're coming across more and more as a demented Gollum. CRYING. [photo available upon request.] .. UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN [aka laserbeam®] [aka ray] SERIAL LIAR. CALL FOR RATES. It is very clear on this listserve who these people are. Ray has admitted being connected to this forger. -- Tony West You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
Re: [UC] The Gordon letter and Brook book
UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN wrote: Glenn wrote: There is a very interesting letter in this week's UC Review. Mitchell. Gordon responds to Paul Levy's letter of last week and follows-up on his original opinion piece about moderately priced housing. In this letter, Gordon touches on the problems the rapid gentrification causes for the young creative class that is the proclaimed focus of Penn's marketing scheme for Philadelphia. He also cites Daniel Brook's book, The Trap, Selling Out to Stay Afloat In Winner-Take-All America. brook writes: The pace of gentrification has accelerated to the point where bohemian communities can no longer take root in major cities like new york. the greenwich village bohemia lasted for decades, soho for ten years, the east village for five, williamsburg for two. the game is over the rising cost of living in major cities snuffs out the forms of noncommercial intellectual creativity for which our most cosmopolitan metropolises have long been known. - - - - - and perhaps it's not just the 'noncommercial' intellectual creativity being snuffed out. there is an interesting, ironic detail in the gazette article about laurie olin, penn's renowned landscape architect who transforms spaces so that 'where once was abandonment, there is now vigor and gentrification' -- we learn just how he got his start, back in 1976: Well, this does raise a couple of interesting questions about creative communities. The general pattern we're discussing is that there are marginal or run-down areas of cities. Bohemians, artists, gays, and radicals move in, because it's cheap to live there. Some of them are motivated enough to fix the places up, make'em appealing, and suddenly affluent people decide they want to live there as well; after all, they have some taste, artists need audiences, and maybe they can bring something to the community that's not necessarily artistis or radical, but useful (grocery stores, coffee shops, boutiques, etc.) Now there's more money in the nabe, the demand for housing goes up, and the bohos, artists and radicals who _didn't_ get in on the ground floor can't afford it anymore. So they move on... maybe to some other place, where the next Talented Tenth will do the work to make things more interesting. There's just one small change I'd make to the above account. Instead of saying that the Creative Class moves in because it's cheap to live there, I'd add that the areas are also _easily changed_. Which is easier to reshape to your own desires-- a fully-preserved Victorian rowhouse in West Philadelphia, or a run-down two-story row home in Northern Liberties? Which is a blanker canvas-- an unused warehouse, or a recently-built set of condos? Which is more fun to customize-- a brand-new Lexus, or a vintage '68 Mustang? Where are creative people more likely to exercise their creativity for the community-- a tightly-regulated and policed Historic District, or a community with a laissez-faire attitude towards one's fellow man? There's a lot that bothers me about this creative-class discussion. For one thing, if we cite these nomads of creativity as an engine for urban improvement, and wail about their being priced out of neighborhoods, we tend to forget about the _really_ poor people that _they_ displaced in the first place. For another, it plays up a distinction between creatives and non-creatives-- which appeals to a lot of peoples' taste for snobbery and self-importance. You know: someone who designs posters for metals bands is an artist, while someone who edits commercials for an ad agency is a corporate drone. The guy who makes wall mosaics with pottery is more an artist than an computer game designer. Thing is, for every creative community, you need an audience. So why disparage people who have taste merely because they don't create the same kinds of things that artists-- real or imagined-- create? (Which brings up another interesting question. How do we know when a community qualifies as creative or not? Apparently, it's when the stuff they create is _commercial_ enough.) You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
Re: [UC] The Gordon letter and Brook book
Thoughtful observations, Brian. Brooks may have a nose for arts ... less so for real estate. There are huge areas of Philadelphia where housing values remain low and boy, could they use some fixing up by Bohemians! Some of these areas aren't so far removed from University City; indeed, they are logical extensions of University City. The stems of Lancaster Ave. beyond 38th St., Baltimore Ave. beyond 49th St. and Woodland Ave. beyond 46th St. are right there, waiting for Brook to move in. Brook is wringing his hands about the inherent dynamism of a healthy metropolis. I.e., the character of its neighborhoods is always changing. You can't freeze them in the past, no matter how sentimentally attached you are to them. I feel this same urge, to mourn the loss of the Good Old Days in my neighborhood. But what I am really mourning, is my youth. Well, guess what? I can't have it back. And neither can anyone else on this thread. The best we can hope for, is a little management of change. I'm deeply dubious of any effort to mandate or legislate retention of starving artists in a neighborhood by some sort of time-capsule approach, in which we simply snarl at anyone who wants to improve the area beyond the level that starving artists have already improved it to. I don't think you can command urban communities not to go up in value anymore than you can command them not to go down in value. Please don't tell me about New York's intellectual woes; let us concentrate on Philadelphia's prospects. If artists can't afford to live in the Big Apple, too bad! They should move here, and let their industries follow them. -- Tony West Brian Siano wrote: brook writes: The pace of gentrification has accelerated to the point where bohemian communities can no longer take root in major cities like new york. the greenwich village bohemia lasted for decades, soho for ten years, the east village for five, williamsburg for two. the game is over the rising cost of living in major cities snuffs out the forms of noncommercial intellectual creativity for which our most cosmopolitan metropolises have long been known. Well, this does raise a couple of interesting questions about creative communities. The general pattern we're discussing is that there are marginal or run-down areas of cities. Bohemians, artists, gays, and radicals move in, because it's cheap to live there. Some of them are motivated enough to fix the places up, make'em appealing, and suddenly affluent people decide they want to live there as well; after all, they have some taste, artists need audiences, and maybe they can bring something to the community that's not necessarily artistis or radical, but useful (grocery stores, coffee shops, boutiques, etc.) Now there's more money in the nabe, the demand for housing goes up, and the bohos, artists and radicals who _didn't_ get in on the ground floor can't afford it anymore. So they move on... maybe to some other place, where the next Talented Tenth will do the work to make things more interesting. There's just one small change I'd make to the above account. Instead of saying that the Creative Class moves in because it's cheap to live there, I'd add that the areas are also _easily changed_. Which is easier to reshape to your own desires-- a fully-preserved Victorian rowhouse in West Philadelphia, or a run-down two-story row home in Northern Liberties? Which is a blanker canvas-- an unused warehouse, or a recently-built set of condos? Which is more fun to customize-- a brand-new Lexus, or a vintage '68 Mustang? Where are creative people more likely to exercise their creativity for the community-- a tightly-regulated and policed Historic District, or a community with a laissez-faire attitude towards one's fellow man? There's a lot that bothers me about this creative-class discussion. For one thing, if we cite these nomads of creativity as an engine for urban improvement, and wail about their being priced out of neighborhoods, we tend to forget about the _really_ poor people that _they_ displaced in the first place. For another, it plays up a distinction between creatives and non-creatives-- which appeals to a lot of peoples' taste for snobbery and self-importance. You know: someone who designs posters for metals bands is an artist, while someone who edits commercials for an ad agency is a corporate drone. The guy who makes wall mosaics with pottery is more an artist than an computer game designer. Thing is, for every creative community, you need an audience. So why disparage people who have taste merely because they don't create the same kinds of things that artists-- real or imagined-- create? You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
Re: [UC] The Gordon letter and Brook book
Brian Siano wrote: Well, this does raise a couple of interesting questions about creative communities. The general pattern we're discussing is that there are marginal or run-down areas of cities. Bohemians, artists, gays, and radicals move in, because it's cheap to live there. Some of them are motivated enough to fix the places up, make'em appealing, and suddenly affluent people decide they want to live there as well; after all, they have some taste, artists need audiences, and maybe they can bring something to the community that's not necessarily artistis or radical, but useful (grocery stores, coffee shops, boutiques, etc.) Now there's more money in the nabe, the demand for housing goes up, and the bohos, artists and radicals who _didn't_ get in on the ground floor can't afford it anymore. So they move on... maybe to some other place, where the next Talented Tenth will do the work to make things more interesting. There's just one small change I'd make to the above account. Instead of saying that the Creative Class moves in because it's cheap to live there, I'd add that the areas are also _easily changed_. Which is easier to reshape to your own desires-- a fully-preserved Victorian rowhouse in West Philadelphia, or a run-down two-story row home in Northern Liberties? Which is a blanker canvas-- an unused warehouse, or a recently-built set of condos? Which is more fun to customize-- a brand-new Lexus, or a vintage '68 Mustang? Where are creative people more likely to exercise their creativity for the community-- a tightly-regulated and policed Historic District, or a community with a laissez-faire attitude towards one's fellow man? There's a lot that bothers me about this creative-class discussion. For one thing, if we cite these nomads of creativity as an engine for urban improvement, and wail about their being priced out of neighborhoods, we tend to forget about the _really_ poor people that _they_ displaced in the first place. For another, it plays up a distinction between creatives and non-creatives-- which appeals to a lot of peoples' taste for snobbery and self-importance. You know: someone who designs posters for metals bands is an artist, while someone who edits commercials for an ad agency is a corporate drone. The guy who makes wall mosaics with pottery is more an artist than an computer game designer. Thing is, for every creative community, you need an audience. So why disparage people who have taste merely because they don't create the same kinds of things that artists-- real or imagined-- create? (Which brings up another interesting question. How do we know when a community qualifies as creative or not? Apparently, it's when the stuff they create is _commercial_ enough.) I think the way to look at this is the way olin himself looks at it: It's not a law, but it is a generally accepted principle that more complex environments tend to be richer and more productive and more stable than simplified environments, he reflects. Monocultures are unstable. Diversified environments are more stable -- you can see it in oceans, you can see it in forests, you can see it in cities. and mitchell gordon (the urban planning journalist) was writing letters to uc review to say this: Agencies campaigning to bring in more students and the Creative Class to this city must take initiatives to preserve and extend affordble housing, no matter how small the initial stepSo many of the people who kept American cities alive and creative through dark decades, when capital abandoned the city, have become victims of capital's recent triumphant return to the city. Let's give this next generation of talent a fighting changce to creatively prosper in this city. we're all inter-connected here, even if you or I are not bohemian and even if you or I are in a position to shrug while newcomers who can't afford it need to move on. and I think we could all pause and wonder what would have happened if laurie olin, back in 1976, had not been able to find that space on market street over a bar next to a strip joint opposite a bus station. we may never know -- but there are people (including olin) who are saying look, when it comes to cities, one thing we do know is that we shouldn't be stacking the deck. .. UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN [aka laserbeam®] [aka ray] SERIAL LIAR. CALL FOR RATES. It is very clear on this listserve who these people are. Ray has admitted being connected to this forger. -- Tony West You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
Re: [UC] The Gordon letter and Brook book
Kyle Cassidy wrote: Glenn, whose sole artistic venture, as far as I know, has been announcing that he'd be drawing a large FUCK UCD sign and then not following through with it, bought up properties in our degenerate hizzle when they were cheap, rennovated them, and rents them to Penn students while freaking out about gentrification and soaring rents on the list -- that Glenn? no, silly, not that glenn. the glenn who posed like a sandwich board in a photo promoting ucd. the creative, artistic, intelligent glenn! :-b .. UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN [aka laserbeam®] [aka ray] SERIAL LIAR. CALL FOR RATES. It is very clear on this listserve who these people are. Ray has admitted being connected to this forger. -- Tony West You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
