current conventional wisdom embraces density, sky-high scrapers, vastly expanded mass transit and ever-smaller apartments. It reflects a desire to create an ideal locale for hipsters and older, sophisticated urban dwellers. [...]
Overlooked, or even disdained, is what most middle-class residents of the metropolis actually want: home ownership, rapid access to employment throughout the metropolitan area, good schools and “human scale” neighborhoods.
— washingtonpost.com
16 Comments
Sad but true.
what do hipsters want that's so different from everybody else?
Horrible click-bait title with misleading hyperbole and ridiculous strawmen - especially dragging out the notorious "hipster" - i.e. "the other" - yeah - most people don't want to live in high-rise, but there's plenty of middle ground between a micro-apartment in manhattan and a mcmansion out in suburban phoenix...
plus you know it's a crappy article when most of his argument hinges on % growth instead of actual numbers.
toward the end he seems to come down from trying to pit us against each other and touch upon "every city has different issues that require different solutions."
"What do hipsters want?"
They want cheeseburgers that are green washed free if guilt.
"Horrible click-bait title with misleading hyperbole and ridiculous strawmen"
Yes. This seems to be the norm for items in the increasingly dreaded and dreadful "news" tab.
I agree with the horrible clickbait characterization, definitely of the headline.
It's also a very black/white argument: he's saying that either a city focuses on attracting the luxury class - are hipsters billionaires? I don't think so - or it focuses on blue collar manufacturing jobs. Apparently we can't try to have both.
"What this all suggests is that the future of American urbanism cannot follow the trajectory of luxury cities..."
So who exactly is trying to do that? Many cities, San Francisco most notably, are facing battles against over-gentrification. Many, many people are already talking about this - it's not like some secret cabal of billionaire hipsters is shutting down that conversation.
And based on what I see locally, no one is trying to be like Manhattan - my city is looking at the aspects of NYC that are appealing and workable, but implementing anything similar with our own brand of Midwestern flavor. Out here in the Middle we're not so dumb as to think "luxury cities" are the only choice...
Ya, but the "hipster class" , meaning young educated mostly white folks, that like artisanal sausages and stuff like that (which is fine,) are pretty much creating a sort of demand for a certain picturesque urban lifestyle. By doing so, they are defining what "urban lifestyle" is, and what an urban dweller is...uncle vito now gets funny looks and he has no idea why. This is sort of what Spike Lee was ranting about. They come in from mostly suburban backgrounds and re-write the rules and the culture over night. The city makes way for them by providing amenities that were not provided to others because they ultimately make the local economy better since they invest in businesses and create a sense of "desirable" trendy sterility to places once truly urban and gritty. They are a force much like the artist class only they bring with them the attitude they grew up with in suburbia. In a way they suburbanize the city by creating a sterilized urbanity. As I've said before, the new urbanites are much like the suburbanites of the 1950s because they want the house on the farm without the smell of the cows. I have friends that would classify as hipsters, and I'm obviously generalizing, but generally speaking, as a larger cultural force, they seem to be making cities more homogenous. As individuals "they" are nice and educated and creative for the most part.
The problem is much much larger that hipsters though and they are not the cause but rather the result of cities losing their utilitarian functions and becoming sold/marketed as lifestyle amenity. Live work play is now the sales pitch..a marketable exception that used to be the rule.
Also to add/edit...they come in overnight and change the culture and can do so not because they earned this right through some cultural immersion or local right of passage, but because they have money. Artists are way different in that respect. The 1980s jean Michael Basquit era in NY also had areas rapidly changing culturally, but the change makers had to imbed them selves in the culture and rise to a place of influence by contributing something of value and cultural relevance. This allows for a sort of cultural continuity. Now they just move in and open a shop which leaves people feeling not only economically displaced but culturally displaced as well.
Many cities, San Francisco most notably, are facing battles against over-gentrification.
Such battles are most often won by money.
Sorry but I don't understand how the title and the first few lines relate to the content of the article.
What I understood from the article is that the author perceives in the US two kinds of cities, one which caters to the "working middle class", the immigrants, families...and the other which is seen as a luxury product, a hub for millionaires and billionaires.
A hipster is certainly not necessarily a billionaire (a hipster is defined by the nature of her or his likes, fashion, music,etc...not money) and it is not out of the question that she or he is just as demanding in terms of finding employment, starting a family and so on.
I've observed that this term "hipster" has become very useful (that is to say, quite useless) as an expression of lazy vitriol. and betrays deep seated plebeian cynicism, even if the one using the word can easily be classified by someone else - who may be just like her or him- as being just as much a "hipster".
In fact, it is quite likely that a person who is uses this word in such a cynical manner (and perhaps, cynicism is the very intention behind using this word anyway) may well be herself or himself a "hipster". And not even a self-hating hipster, being not too bright about who she or he is...more of a hipster-hating-hipster.
If great Urban places are being "over gentrified" then why not build more urbanism that shares the characteristics that people seem to like about San Francisco? Why is this so hard to figure out? And what's with hipster bashing? I've always wanted to eat artisinal sausage, not becasue it makes me look cool, but it isn't bathed in chemicals and, tastes Great!
ok, hipsters want a higher density suburbia...got it!
"hipster" is media creation. The evangelical republican office manager in my work place eat's local and organic and wears tight jeans. I guess she's a hipster!
Hipsters are an easily identifiable group, we can conveniently separate them not entirely based on appearance like mods or Goths but on their location and conspicuous lifestyle choices. This sub culture is getting a lot of attention because they are responsible for or front line witness to dynamic shifts in the urban culture and economy.
So this article is disappointing in that it has not delved into the historical background that is critical for a full understanding of why we have "luxury cities" and other cities.
But what is possibly more disappointing is the article is not discussing how the sunbelt is becoming more and more susceptible to the calamitous effects of global climate change. Rust belt cities are for the most part far safer from climate disaster than the sunbelt, and having water and protected harbors, adjacent farmland and oceans that still have viable fish stocks enables some food and water security as long as those resources are managed and protected.
The West, the south, and the gulf are about to smash up against a wall when it comes to their population growth, and this wall is coming really fast as people still believe they can have a green lawn open swimming pool and not have to worry about flash flooding when they pave over stream beds for parking lots. The rust belt has suffered through and learned from their mistakes and is slowly correcting them at tremendous expense, but investment now in resilience, when concrete and steel are still cheap and financing is still possible will pay off with cities like Chicago and Cleveland or other Rust belt cities absorbing refugees from the next Katrina that huts Huston or the next major water supply system that is poisoned by fraking in Dallas. Trucked in water is nasty and once a city's water system is severely compromised like in West Virginia it changes the culture and people begin to look elsewhere to raise a family when safe drinking water, a third world problem, becomes a major issue here in the US.
What do hipsters want? Whatever is trendy. What's trendy in architecture right now? Green design. This bleeds into the idea of outdoor space, cleaner air, green space and fresh produce. That's all well and good, and if that's what you want, then move to the suburbs. Cities are about density, and density requires things like parking spaces, sidewalks and drivable roads.
In NYC, they've started closing sections of major roads to put outdoor plaza's with planters and chairs, I guess to give the city a more Parisian look, and it's stupid. Why would I want to eat my lunch where less than 10 feet away is the busiest road in the city? You'll breath in more pollution within your half hour lunch break than a pack a day smoker, which is kind of funny considering a lot of people use these spaces for their smoke break.
And since they've installed these plaza things, it now takes longer to get through the city in a car. "Yea, so what? 'll walk or ride a bike." That's fine, until you have to take a cab from times square to a meeting in Tribeca, and suddenly you realize, what used to be a relatively easy commute is now complicated by half closed roads, pedestrian plazas, bicyclists who've never ridden a bicycle in manhattan before, and pedestrians who are too busy writing a tweet to move out of your way.
And in the end, most hipsters only live in a city for a few years. They go to school, try to work, realize how expensive it is to live in a city, and move back home. So why waste time and money catering to a bunch of people who don't appreciate what they have in front of them, and will ultimately leave anyway?
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.