There was supposed to be a point to the post below, but it appears I fell asleep before making it. The point is/was that NYC, or even a certain socioeconomic slice of the city, is not following the cult of Baby, just a whole lot of people in Park Slope. There seem to be many more wealthy and often white people moving to the now-safe, now-wealthy city post-college, and of that group, only this one segment has put aside the Pill.
Why Park Slope? Probably because it's been filled with gentry for a long time. Visiting friends in the area during high school, I remember being somewhat jealous of these classmates who could claim to be hardcore (BrookLYN!), which was important at Stuyvesant, and yet lived on their own floor in massive houses on tree-and-cafe-lined streets. Those coming from far smaller abodes in posh parts of Manhattan had neither entire wings of the family manor, nor any claims on street cred. People worked with what they had. Coming from the West 80s or 90s, for some, was proof of toughness, but never as convincing as an outer borough address. This was the late 1990s, and these were among my wealthier classmates, so assuming these houses were not purchased the day I saw them, there has been an alternate-UWS going on for some time. I'd imagine some not-so-anecdotal evidence backs this up.
Those looking to babify are not necessarily looking to gentrify. If a few upscale shops and restaurants open to greet these new arrivals, so be it, but this is not a group set on opening the first independent coffee shop in 10 square miles.
Wednesday, October 03, 2007
Park Slope is for lovers, II
Posted by Phoebe Maltz Bovy at Wednesday, October 03, 2007
Labels: progressive-universalist babies
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment