You forgot to mention every old woman in every borough. They seem to be the most vocal. Why old women? I don't know but just check out the angry demographic at all these meetings.
"Unclear to me which is the worst headline." You know this is incorrect, right?
Also, a Catskills-style humor piece is an oxymoron, and wrong- "Catskills humor," does not exist: it's known as Borscht belt humor, or comedy, sometimes just jewish humor, and is spoken, not written.
I suggest that if you want to tackle criticism you learn something first. Like what it is you're trying to say? And how to say it?
And I agree with Dennis, and Samyu. You are the one who has no business writing about the trendifying/ gentrification machine you and your shoddy publication feed off of. Are you defending it, or just jealous of the real writers at the Times, who actually do know what they're talking about, even if they sound (on purpose) like stodgy Manhattanites?
I would argue that you have even less of a sense of what Brooklyn is than Henry Alford does: looking at it as you do through the incredibly tiny window of your limited intellect and even more circumscribed sense of the borough. At least the Times covers parts of Brooklyn that aren't filled with kale, beards, and spoiled children of privilege pretending to be writers.
Sarcastic article serves to further inflame critics and alienate cyclists. Instead, step-up, grit your teeth, and invite them for friendly discussions.
The veggie burger at MOB is aaaaaamazing. AMAZING. There is some crazy sauce that they told us the totally normal ingredients of and I swear to you it is inexplicable and magical.
is there supposed to be more than one photo?
I think the two of them have wasted to many years in not working together because of this constant bickering back and forth. They could have accomplished so much more wonderful and terrific music together if they had just been able to get their acts together professionally. When they are on the right page with each other there is nothing better.
Your all in the wrong place. You need to move to London. Americans all over the goddam place these days.
Hipster Dust is back. We’re doing a limited summer run of 500 tins. Get ‘em while you can!
And thank you, Samyu. You have said it best of all the commentary I have ever read in all the media venues covering "new Brooklyn":
"why don't YOU go out and take a look at the 'real' Brooklyn? you know, people of color, people who can't afford college, or food, or rent. people who don't speak english, people who have come here from places far away and work 18-hour days and send all their money home to another place.
cause you don't have any interest in poor people who can't afford $7 chocolate bars and $15 cocktails. And neither do your advertisers."
Yes. And sigh. Oh, SIGH.
I echo these other commenters in relishing Ms. Iversen's [and the L Magazine's] hypocrisy. Ms. Iversen's indignation is ostensible. In fact, she is irked that not all mass media is immediately and explicitly sycophant towards "hipster buzzwords made flesh." Let's make no mistake--Mr. Alford's article is hardly critical though quite comedic of hipsters, Williamsburg or gentrification. Such is the state of things that the tone of such an article constitutes "trolling" by the NY Times. It reminds me of that article by Goldson for the WG News, "We're All Hipsters," that claims, ludicrously, that mass media is somehow arrayed in full against "hipsters." Meanwhile, he is writing from a media organ created, owned and operated by "hipsters," like Ms. Iversen here--and yet there is no lack of projection.
Ms. Iversen needs do her homework: the NY Times did not recently discover or jump on the bandwagon or is late on gentrification in Williamsburg. WRONG. The NY Times was quite possibly the FIRST MASS MEDIA organ to solicit, forget 'discovering,' gentrification in Williamsburg, writing about "artists" and housing in Williamsburg as far back as 1983. It did not recently "begin" reporting on Williamsburg. In the past thirty years of gentrification in Williamsburg, the NY Times' Real Estate section has written MULTIPLE articles on Williamsburg in EACH decade, and respondents have each time attempted to mock the NY Times' reporting. All the while the mocking is inferior than the quality of the writing it mocks. So that other commenter talking about "envy" and being "so 2000" is more comedic than anything Alford can caricature. That commenter, like Iversen, is SO 1983.
What's a 'spare guest room' - does it mean that you have one guest room you use for your guests and one you don't? Or does it mean that the guest room is spare?
"Brooklyn is actually a place where millions of people actually live and work. And it's not all fixed-gear bikes and artisanal mayonnaise."
UMMMM, this website covers nothing but the college-educated artisanal-mayo makers riding fixies. are you seriously taking the times to task for that? when they cover everything, and you cover NAIL ART? you're so stupid you can't even see the insane hypocrisy of your own argument...
why don't YOU go out and take a look at the 'real' Brooklyn? you know, people of color, people who can't afford college, or food, or rent. people who don't speak english, people who have come here from places far away and work 18-hour days and send all their money home to another place.
cause you don't have any interest in poor people who can't afford $7 chocolate bars and $15 cocktails. And neither do your advertisers.
you're not a real journalist. because who needs to be? you're just someone who rehashes writing from real publications to flesh out a slapdash advertising pamphlet. which fills trash cans feet away from where it's handed out for free.
also elegant to use "actually" twice in the same sentence like that. that pulitzer will be in any day now.
If you don't like the way the shit smells why are you rubbing your face in it?
John's right- the only people who need to talk about the idea of hipsters are the people who are trying to capitalize on it.
Brooklyn Magazine has some skin in that game: they swooped in and jumped on the Brooklyn/Williamsburg bandwagon just a year ago- if there were no hipster culture to instruct us about (and tell us who's too lame to participate, or even comment on, it) how would they be able to pose as authorities and package and sell Brooklyn to their multi-national advertisers and festival sponsors?
I mean, is there anything lamer than the Northside Festival? SO INDY. And how much money does it make for this magazine? A lot. So yeah, let these people tell you what's cool and what's not. If you believe them, they'll make money.
I mean, WIlliamsburg's ringed with condos built by the Toll Brothers, and there are more people getting of the subway in Brooklyn wearing suits than there are on the Upper East Side. But defend that 'culture'- it's really worth a lot to you- it's what pays the bills, right?
Just moved to Brooklyn from California. All I've been hearing lately are Brooklyn is too hipster bla bla bla. I tried to find nice restaurants and bars on Yelp and I'll I read are people commenting on the hipster-ness of the businesses.
Who cares? Why do people need to comment on the hipster quotient of every neighborhood and establishment? From my personal experience the whole topic is so overblown. Most of the places that people say are "too hipster" aren't even. It's just a dumb topic of conversation that people find enjoyable because they must have nothing better to talk about.
Perhaps it's you who should try harder, seeing as you've just recycled the exact same lame lead-in to your last Times-slamming piece.
And considering that you blog for a publication that has turned all the lame, tired, joke subjects of this Times article into the flesh and blood of a full-sized (essentailly contentless, natch) magazine.
And considering that this piece is filled with attempts at humour far feebler than any of Alford's.
And considering that you have yourself fallen for the very "troll bait" you mock the Times for generating.
And considering that you're from Westchester, living and writing about the bohemian life while somebody else pays your rent...
I guess you know something about what's not relatable to most people.
follow up tomorrow and tells us which neighborhood hs highest unemployment or jobs prospects
You raise some prefectly knowledgeable and important points that I too was thinking of, and more since you obviously have more experience with Brooklyn and I am still a rookie. It is great of you to oppose to this article, as people with the knowledge can and should!
It is a very tiring aspect of history repeating itself and it happens all around the world, that perhaps just because they can or because of a feeling of threat, a brilliant and up-and-coming aspect of a place is brought down through publicity by another. I have witnessed it in Europe while living and travelling and now here, back in NY with Brooklyn. It is truly sad that instead of seeing apart from the fact that it is a place, as you said, where people live and work that so many young and innovative minds have found grounds to flourish and maintain a lifestyle that may as well be eaten up for breakfast by the unstoppable and ever faster Manhattan lifestyle. Nothing is wrong with either, and I love both Manhattan and Brooklyn, and it is a great pitty that as grown ups and well established buisness people we cannot leave aside the petty, high school antagonisms and live with what is - name it what you will. We are not talking appraisal but at least dignified cohabitation.
Meh...it has gotten a bit rediculous and coming from the Times... perhaps there is a decline in everything after all (just as history has shown)
Bravo to you Kristen. You really hit what bothers me about writers such as Henry Alford. I hope you submit this as an op-ed. To me, Brooklyn was a place where young people are forming a community.
My take on Williamsburg...
It's 2004 and you have just moved to Manhattan at 22. You try to get a job at a major publication such as The New Yorker or Vogue. And you do, as unpaid intern. To subsidize your dream, you take a job at a coffee shop in Williamsburg and a clothing store in SoHo. After a year, you are promoted to Senior Intern with ... no pay. You move to Bushwick or East Williamsburg to save money on rent.
Finally you are offered a job at the magazine! But, you realize that you earn more as a Barista. You ditch the magazine and continue making latte's. You create a blog as a creative outlet, play guitar in a band, and sell vintage at the Brooklyn Flea. Perhaps, after five years you turn your interests in a lucrative business and some schmuck like Henry Alford who spent his early years in NYC getting paid $2.00 a word and now writes for Vanity Fair and The New York Times stops by to trivialize the place you live in using a song by the Black Eyed Peas.
Henry you are soooo two-thousand-too-late and so very jealous.
I am so tired of the Williamsburg-hate.
When I lived in NY, I loved Brooklyn neighborhoods. I really thought that Brooklyn was a place where you could make your NYC dreams come true. Perhaps, Manhattan was like that when Henry started his career. Sorry for the rant, but I think that it's great that folks of our generation, are able to thrive in places like Williamsburg, and aren't discouraged by factors that could have hindered creativity, such as 9/11 and an unstable economy.
© 2013 The L Magazine
Website powered by Foundation