Best Urban Shopping Area

[ablarc]

BEST URBAN SHOPPING AREA

Shopping in the suburbs involves driving to a mall or strip center. Once there, you plunks down your money and you drive home with the goods. There?s no civic component to the experience, because you?re never in a public place.

You can import the concept of a mall into a walkable city, and it works surprisingly well if connected at both ends, as in the case of Copley Place/Prudential Mall. In this case, it functions as a street, providing a way to get from one place to another; it?s a shortcut from Back Bay to the South End.

Cambridgeside Galleria, by contrast, is an isolated destination. Like its cousins in the suburbs, it?s not urban.

Here?s a list of ten places to shop in urban Boston. By any criteria you choose, pick the three you think are best. (And tell us why.)

Newbury Street
Harvard Square
Charles Street
Quincy Market
Downtown Crossing
Hanover Street
Copley Place/Prudential Mall
Coolidge Corner
Boylston Street, Back Bay
Harvard Street, Allston

[Ron Newman]

Hanover Street is a great street but it is not a shopping street. Almost everything on it is a restaurant.

I'd put Newbury and Boylston together as a single shopping area.

[ablarc]

^ Shopping for a meal and a cannoli.

Boylston and Newbury feel completely different from each other. They may be physically proximate, but they have different souls.

[ablarc]

But you're right, Ron; Salem Street might have been a better choice.

[czsz]

I wouldn't consider anything in the North End "destination shopping" in the way these other areas are. Ditto Charles Street. And Ron is right about Newbury/Boylston...one could even make the case that they are totally complementary to the Prudential Center as well.

[Ron Newman]

Charles Street used to be known as a destination for antique shopping, but I'm not sure it still is.

[czsz]

But niche shopping isn't the same as destination shopping, either. If I want to buy Indian groceries, Union Square in Somerville is currently my best bet - but I'd hardly go there for general shopping.

[JohnCostello]

What about Fields Corner or the center of Chelsea? Sometimes a great shopping area has to have some "grit" as some of the users of this site to be good. Does a good shopping area have to be defined as someplace that has to have a $75 hemp shirt along with a metal faux gargoyle? What about a place that has a store to get shampoo and the ability to get walk next door to get a good Guinness?

By the way can people start to disuse "grit" on their posts. I have seen some pretty bad "grit" i.e. rats, roaches, homeless people, empty storefronts up and down Newbury and Boylston Street for the past 25 years. Is "grit" a code word for how the "other people" live? Is it like a a trip to the zoo where you see the "grit" and go back to your world? Broadway in Chelsea has a far fewer empty storefronts right now than Newbury Street. Some people would say Chelsea has a lot of "grit" but I see a thriving community shopping mostly local merchants.

On the other hand Wellesley Square, Centre Street in West Roxbury, Centre Street in JP, Newton Center, Arlington, Arlington Heights, the center of Medford aren't that bad either.

[ablarc]

Charles Street used to be known as a destination for antique shopping, but I'm not sure it still is.
It is. Last time, I was gratified most of them are still there. Still Boston's premier antiques destination. Marika's is still there, but doubtless without Marika.

I rented a condo on Cedar Lane Way. It came with a kitchen, so I shopped for food at DeLuca's and Savenor's and had breakfast daily at the out-of-this-world French bakery, Cafe Vanille. A very nice neighborhood shopping street with magnetism for antiques and curio shoppers. The Thai Restaurant (King and I) near the Charles Circle end was superb at commendably low prices.

[kennedy]

By the way can people start to disuse "grit" on their posts. I have seen some pretty bad "grit" i.e. rats, roaches, homeless people, empty storefronts up and down Newbury and Boylston Street for the past 25 years. Is "grit" a code word for how the "other people" live? Is it like a a trip to the zoo where you see the "grit" and go back to your world? Broadway in Chelsea has a far fewer empty storefronts right now than Newbury Street. Some people would say Chelsea has a lot of "grit" but I see a thriving community shopping mostly local merchants.

IMO, "grit" has nothing to do with socioeconomic class. It has to do with liveliness, variety, and cohesion. Grit is vibrant. As opposed to a mall, which does not have grit, regardless of whether it houses a Dollar Tree or a Saks.

I haven't finished it yet, but I associate everything Jane Jacobs talks about in The Death and Life of Great American Cities as "grit." If you haven't read it, it's wicked interesting and I highly suggest it.

[ablarc]

^ You may have sanded off the grit's rough edges with your not-really-standard definition. I believe most folks would choose Harvard Street in Allston as the above list's best place to encounter grit.

[czsz]

Yeah, "grit" really shouldn't migrate into territory better-described by other terms ("vibrancy," "brio", etc.)

I do agree that it's difficult to get a lot of utilitarian shopping done on many of the streets in this list. Even in Harvard Square, which no one would dispute is a shopping destination, there isn't really a decent grocery store. It's amazing how many urban residents in Boston drive out to strip malls in South Bay or Alewife to get heavy-duty shopping done.

[kennedy]

So then what is grit? What John Costello said? Less money?

An edgier place? Because somewhere can be "edgy" and have wealth.

What makes Harvard Street or Harvard Square more "gritty" than DTX, Newbury St., or the North End?

[czsz]

Frankly, I associate it with dirt and a sort of blue collar workaday, industrial aesthetic. I think of dingy dive bars in the dark shadows of grease-sweating elevated subways, for example.

[ablarc]

^ I think you could say DTX is somewhat gritty, but not Harvard Square.

[czsz]

I agree.

[blade_bltz]

What about Chinatown for gritty?

[kennedy]

Chinatown could be, I guess. I don't know what grit is, but we seem to have a few various definitions here.

[czsz]

I would say Chinatown definitely qualifies.

Look, it's a subjective term. When I think of "grit," I think of the dirty snow that accumulates on city streets two weeks after a storm - fused with scenes from "The French Connection".

[ablarc]

You get bonus points for rats.

[garbribre]

Ron didn't invoke Davis yet? That's curious!
Porter? Central?
All still have grocery stores?

By default, limited to the listed choices: Coolidge (lived there, gladly, during the early 80s); Harvard Street in Allston (spent a lot of time there since childhood because family lived there into the 90s); Harvard Square (despite not having a grocer?) because it's always been lively, from my recollection.

Many of the rest could be malls in the 'burbs for all I care.

What about the other, sometimes smaller, less touristy neighborhood commercial zones, some of which have been invoked by others here--Chinatown, Fields Corner, Mattapan Square, Roslindale Square, Central in JP? Cleveland Circle? Many of these are far more worthy and interesting than the Copley Place Mall.

Hanover Street would be on my list, too, because it was for the neighborhood, then developed into a tourist destination--not engineered as a tourist destination like Quincy Market or Copley (or the Pru?).

Newbury has changed from when I was kid, too. It was a mix of 'high(er)' end shopping and 'funky' for locals--often small, locally-owned establishments--as opposed to now, where it seems like a shopping magnet for tourists with money who can go to too many of these establishments in any city, anywhere in the world. Yawn.

Charles Street almost fits my criteria (still?) and could be a worthy choice.

It's probably all too different now; I haven't lived there since the 80s. Coolidge, Harvard Street, and I know Harvard Square have been infiltrated by more (too many?) chains.

However, understand that I don't disparage the chains, until they become a majority of businesses in a neighborhood.

Anything that seems catered to attracting tourists is suspect. Even 1976 to the present Quincy Market, which would be suspect, lost whatever made it unique within its first five years of re-invention. (Now, old Quincy Market--that was GRIT! However, I am not going to get into that side discussion again here.)

The Pru, Copley, and even Downtown Crossing are all destination 'malls' and, seemingly, not intended for residents. That's why Downtown Crossing has become a failure. Office workers treat it like the mall, which is fine for the daytime. However, they ignore it at night, along with the locals AND the tourists. (Plus, all the stupid gits quoted in the article recently posted about re-opening its traffic should give you a prime indication why it's a failure.) I suspect the Pru (no longer) and Copley do not suffer this fate.

I've had this argument here before. Shopping/retail is to serve the locals. If commerical businesses, of all types, become of interest to those outside the neighborhood, that's great, but shouldn't be its prime goal.

That's why I objected to something like Landsdowne Street as a primary destination for clubbing. These clubs should be scattered everywhere, not funneled into a zone. Theater 'district'--Bah! Again, entertainments should be scattered throughout the city. I don't have a problem with a concentration of a few establishments of a similar ilk, like the theatre district is, or was, when orchestrated intentionally, or not. However, that kind of planning in the present is idiotic.

[czsz]

Shopping/retail is to serve the locals.

But shopping zones like Downtown Crossing have had a citywide purpose since the 19th century. Seriously - there was no such thing as far-flung "neighborhood" retail until rapid transit made streetcar suburbia plausible - and long commutes made downtown shopping a chore. Even most of Back Bay was residential until the 20th century.

I would argue that Harvard Square hardly serves locals in the same way as, say, Centre St. in JP. It's sustained, during the day, by the Harvard workforce, and, at night, by students with high disposable incomes looking for meals. But most of the shopping is really once-in-a-while, niche stuff - not everyday purposes. It's ridiculous that one has to walk nearly a mile from it to find produce. I guess it helps that most of the "locals" are undergraduates with well-stocked dining halls.

That's why I objected to something like Landsdowne Street as a primary destination for clubbing. These clubs should be scattered everywhere, not funneled into a zone. Theater 'district'--Bah! Again, entertainments should be scattered throughout the city. I don't have a problem with a concentration of a few establishments of a similar ilk, like the theatre district is, or was, when orchestrated intentionally, or not. However, that kind of planning in the present is idiotic.

I agree up to a point. It really does help to sustain, say, Davis Square to have a music venue, more than it would if that venue were clustered somewhere downtown. But on the other hand, it would be nice to go somewhere really active in Boston at night - especially if that somewhere felt less contrived than Lansdowne. I've argued before that Downtown Crossing should be more like Istiklal Caddesi in Istanbul, which is both a major shopping and nightlife street.

[Ron Newman]

There's a 24-hour grocery in the old Sage's space, at Brattle and Church streets.

Broadway Market is not in Harvard Square but it's a lot closer than a mile to it.

[JohnCostello]

Ron:

That market in the old Sage's is being subsidized, to the best of my knowledge, at least on its rent, by Harvard. I do not know who operates the market but Harvard took over the lease on the space after Sprint or whatever phone company rented the 4,000 SF+ space for a very stupidly high rent in 2004 and then quickly vacated after realizing that you do not need 4,000 SF on a far off corner of Harvard Square to sell a phone that fits in your hand.

So while the market is great there is no way that the market could make it on its own, rent wise, without some sort of help from WGU. The market is nice, and much cleaner than Sage's was towards then end but from a somewhat free market view of development, the market is a loss leader. It improves the streetscape but makes that overall esscence of that corner far better.

It would be a great world if we all had a sugar daddy with a few billion (and they still have plenty o'billions) lying around to make everyone feel better about the neighborhood and make nice streetscapes but that isn't the real world.

[blade_bltz]

So subsidies and Harvard's billions exist outside of the "real world"?

We're talking about the best urban shopping area in the Boston area. Why would the fortunate fact of Harvard's existence rule out the candidacy of Harvard Square?

Anyway, I saw that little market when I was at home in December. Seems like a great addition to the area. And it's 24hrs.

Edit: Perhaps the implication was that Harvard Square is unrepresentative, and therefore not useful as a model for improving/planning new shopping areas in places outside WGU's immediate influence. Either way, I don't see what is wrong with playing on Boston's unique strengths. Letting normal free market forces work tends to give us lifestyle centers in the suburbs. Which mechanism do you prefer?

[garbribre]

^WGU's?
WTF? :p

I would argue that Harvard Square hardly serves locals in the same way as, say, Centre St. in JP. It's sustained, during the day, by the Harvard workforce, and, at night, by students with high disposable incomes looking for meals. But most of the shopping is really once-in-a-while, niche stuff - not everyday purposes. It's ridiculous that one has to walk nearly a mile from it to find produce. I guess it helps that most of the "locals" are undergraduates with well-stocked dining halls.

Wasn't always that way, though.

But shopping zones like Downtown Crossing have had a citywide purpose since the 19th century. Seriously - there was no such thing as far-flung "neighborhood" retail until rapid transit made streetcar suburbia plausible - and long commutes made downtown shopping a chore.
Even most of Back Bay was residential until the 20th century.

An old-world, agricultural, rural model, that was slow to change but forced to by rapidly expanding developments during the industrial revolution?

I agree up to a point. It really does help to sustain, say, Davis Square to have a music venue, more than it would if that venue were clustered somewhere downtown. But on the other hand, it would be nice to go somewhere really active in Boston at night - especially if that somewhere felt less contrived than Lansdowne. I've argued before that Downtown Crossing should be more like Istiklal Caddesi in Istanbul, which is both a major shopping and nightlife street.

As for the shopping issue, for starters, I should have clarified that I meant as a present day, auto culture model. (Additionally, that still shouldn't excuse this way of compartmentalizing things.)

Why should it be presented as or designed to be the only one?
Why should Downtown Crossing be THE destination?
Maybe if they had more residents IN the immediate area, that would help.
Time will tell, as the new student residences infuse some life. However, students shouldn't be the only life. (Meaning put the residential component BACK into the Filene's project and into every other project within blocks of this in the future.)

Why can't we have clubs in the Financial District again? Downtown Crossing? Fort Point? (Are there still clubs on Harvard St, Allston? Bunratty's?) I loathe the designed entertainment zone--having six different types of music venues lined up on a block, one for every taste, like an automat. Again, trying to engineer Lansdowne like a Disney adult entertainment zone in Orlando--eeech!

The city wasn't 'the city' then as we know it now, either. It was separate villages, towns, and other cities for a while until they were annexed, mostly within the last 150 years or so, and all had their own cluster of commerce and entertainment.

Ach! What am I trying to say? Too many topics to cover in one post without going into too much depth, and I don't want to ramble on anymore. *sigh* But I will.

I think about the small(ish) neighborhood dry goods store, of which there were many, which sufficed when the needs of the locals were less varied, or maybe the residents were more conservative and less demanding with their needs. We want everything available 24/7 and we have to have it NOW.

I dunno, again. What would be a better analogy...?

I think we may be overlooking some traditional model of a village center, which is what comprises most of these neighborhood and village shopping areas of Boston. Would they be more relevant as a product of an old world geographic model?

Sure, the concept of going downtown or into the city seems more of a post-industrial revolution kind of idea. I'm not well versed in this socio-anthropology.

People from the far-flung farmlands went into cities for different or similar concerns in 'the old days?' When and why did entertainment and commerce become separated like this? Yeah, streetcar burbs and the auto allowed the expansion and created the separation. I get that. Who thought this was a good idea? Was somebody such a futurist that they saw the advent of the automobile and easy transportation for a day's entertainment from the far-flung places or did it happen organically?

It killed the traveling salesman, vaudeville tours, and sucked the life and the diversity out of what happens in those far-flung locales by convincing everyone that the only way to find worthy entertainment was to come to 'The City.' The excitement of the advance publicity about some big new production whether it was filmed or live, will no longer come near or to you; You come to it.

For a while, it seems that traveling into the nearest big city to the event for the day became the entertainment as much as it was about the event you were attending. Also, instead of enjoying the event for what it was, it had become all about the rest of the environment surrounding the event. (Hey, I am guilty of functioning like this, too. Not criticizing; just observing.)

I am all over the place. I'm done with this. I'm gonna shut up now.

[czsz]

I did forget about that little market on Brattle and Church...but let's not kid ourselves. This is not a supermarket...it's a fluffily upscale corner store with some ready to eat stuff. Most of the same types of products I can get at the nearby CVS and 711 for less...and most of their stock (which is heavily gourmet) was already available at Cardullo's. I still have to trek to Shaw's at Porter or the virtually inaccessible Star on Beacon St. in Somerville for the kind of shopping available to most suburbanites. Let's not even talk about why the two Whole Foods and one Trader Joe's in Cambridge are located well away from transit stops.

As for Harvard subsidies...direct or otherwise, the entirety of Harvard Square is subsidized by the fact of the university's existence there.

[blade_bltz]

Wait a sec. The two Whole Foods you speak of are the Fresh Pond one and the River St one, right? I just googled and apparently there is a third Whole Foods on Prospect, just north of Central. Can anyone confirm whether this is up to date?

[ablarc]

I just googled and apparently there is a third Whole Foods on Prospect, just north of Central.
That was the first one in Greater Boston. Used to be called Bread and Circus.

[czsz]

Yeah, there's one on Prospect north of Central, but it's still an annoying walk from the square - and, for Harvard Sq. area residents, no better than hopping on the T to Shaw's in Porter.

[ablarc]

If you were told to sort the ten shopping areas above into just two meaningful categories, you could divide them into regional shopping areas and neighborhood shopping areas (None of these is 100% pure, however).

Thus you could say Newbury St, Harvard Sq, Copley Place, Quincy Market, Downtown Crossing and Boylston Street serve primarily a wider clientele than is provided by the immediate neighborhood, while the other four can be seen as neighborhood Main Streets. Poll responders have so far voted for the former category over the latter by a margin of 38 to 8.

[underground]

I'm not sure I agree with the concept of this thread. Wouldn't the best urban shopping area be the shopping area that serves it's urban community the best? It seems to me that the question of this poll is really, "What is your favorite shopping area that just happens to be in the city?" What I'm getting at is that Hanover St., Charles St., Newbury St., etc. don't really "serve" their communities. In fact, they "serve" tourists and people coming in from out of town who want to go to high end boutiques a few times a year. In outlining the poll, Ablarc throws the Galleria out, but as a North End resident I have to say... the Galleria serves my every day shopping needs WAAAY better than Hanover St. does (outside of the White Hen and the package store which no one was probably counting anyway).

[cden4]

The Galleria has a lot of very useful stores. Would I prefer that the stores were all along some sort of "Main Street" and not in a mall? Yes.

[ablarc]

It seems to me that the question of this poll is really, "What is your favorite shopping area that just happens to be in the city?"
Good point.

Moderator ?

.

[Ron Newman]

Would I prefer that the stores were all along some sort of "Main Street" and not in a mall?

The answer to that may depend on the weather.

[vanshnookenraggen]

I can't change the poll.

[ablarc]

I can't change the poll.
Well, actually, if you could... what difference would it make?

[czsz]

The answer to that may depend on the weather.

I'm not so sure. If the Galleria were on a transit stop, I might be more sympathetic. But like the notoriously inaccessible Kendall Square cinema, it's oddly more friendly to drivers than pedestrians, even those who live in that part of Cambridge.

Concentrating stores on 2-3 levels also means they are not spread out to the point that at least some of them would be more convenient to residents several blocks away.

I think I would be much happier if all these stores were in Kendall Square proper. It would be worth losing the roof.

[underground]

^Lechmere's less than a 5 min walk to the Galleria.

[jass]

^Lechmere's less than a 5 min walk to the Galleria.

Less actually, its exactly 2 blocks away.

[tobyjug]

Harvard Street is tops. You got your discount liquor, Mr. Music for used guitar, some bar rooms, bookie.

[underground]

Here's my Devil's Advocate case for the Landmark Center:

1) It's businesses serve the community it's in. There's a Best Buy, a Bed Bath and Beyond, a movie theatre, etc. In other words, businesses that locals use often, not businesses that tourists to use infrequently.

2) It's next to transit. Yeah, yeah, there's also parking. Well hopefully that will go away when the circle is redesigned and that part of the Fenway starts to pick up. In any case, the parking's not huge and I'd bet the majority of customers walk or take the train.

3) It's mixed use. There are offices and retail. I'm not sure if there's residential (I think not), but at least the building has residences surrounding it (excluding up Brookline Ave.).

4) It's got ground level activity. There's stuff all along Brookline Ave. and you can actually see the activity the businesses create.

5) It's a beutiful adaptive re-use.

[ablarc]

Harvard Street is tops. You got your discount liquor, Mr. Music for used guitar, some bar rooms, bookie.
Bookie ?

[ablarc]

After 28 forumers have weighed in, Newbury Street is way out front with 24 votes, followed by Harvard Square and Copley Place/Pru with 12 each, and Coolidge Corner with 8. Downtown Crossing straggles in in fifth place with 6 votes. Forty years ago, Downtown would have been as far ahead as Newbury Street is today.

[Ron Newman]

And even Harvard Square has struggled with some loss of retailers, both local and chain. It has also been overrun by too many banks and ATMs.

People like me, who've watched it change over 30+ years, often complain that it has lost its local identity. But it's still much healthier than Downtown Crossing right now.

[ablarc]

People like me, who've watched it change over 30+ years, often complain that it has lost its local identity. But it's still much healthier than Downtown Crossing right now.
It's like complaining that something's not perfect.

[ablarc]

After 32 votes, bringing up the rear are Charles Street, Hanover Street, Harvard Street in Allston, and Quincy Market. The first three are neighborhood Main Streets, though Charles and Hanover have some attraction for outsiders. For a few years, Quincy Market would have won this poll; it would have scored ahead of Downtown, Harvard Square and (yes) Newbury Street. Now, it seems, it's strictly for tourists.

[Beton Brut]

Now, it seems, it's strictly for tourists.

Does anyone have present-day data on the percentage of locally owned retailers at the Quincy Market? Does anyone recall what the place looked and felt like in 1978?

And, does anyone think that there's a correlation between the tourists adopting the place (and locals considering it a tourist trap) and the fact that the overwhelming majority of retailers would find a happy home in AnyMall, USA?

[statler]

Does anyone have present-day data on the percentage of locally owned retailers at the Quincy Market? Does anyone recall what the place looked and felt like in 1978?
Well, I was 4 years old at the time, so... no. But I would love to hear other's recollections.


And, does anyone think that there's a correlation between the tourists adopting the place (and locals considering it a tourist trap) and the fact that the overwhelming majority of retailers would find a happy home in AnyMall, USA?

Chicken or the egg?

[Jane Jetson]

I don't think the problem of loss of local identity is restricted to Boston; I think it started with the rise of the malls throughout the country. Chains are everywhere now - how can a local clothing store compete with Banana Republic? Local identity now is provided by souvenir shops - you know where you are by the knickknacks.

[czsz]

...and even the knickknacks look the same (albeit with a few different words written on them).

[ablarc]

Quincy Market? Does anyone recall what the place looked and felt like in 1978?

It was the apotheosis of good taste. It was a vision of a shining future.

With our Dansk utensils we would eat venison and quail on a field of purest Marimekko.

Served at room temperature, our brie would run and come garnished with a pear. Henceforth wheat crackers would abrade the membranes of our mouths.

Spartan would be the new luxury. We would cook like peasants in order to eat like kings.

All colors would be primary-bright, all materials honest and true. The world?s counters would be solid maple, and its wheelchair ramps clad by Pirelli. This would be a world where everything sparkled --from Dom Perignon to Christmas lights in trees.

You would be able to get a baguette just like the ones in Paris.

* * *

Though conceived and shepherded by an architect who knew his stuff, this would be a vision waffled out of the romantic vapors of Architecture without Architects; photomurals from Rudofsky?s quasi-seminal work graced stairwells and corridors of the great man?s atelier without anyone quite knowing why --though subliminally, it did sort of make sense.

In 1973, if repressed puritan fanatic Sayyid Qutb (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sayyid_Qutb) had lobbed a grenade through the basement window of a certain crenellated Tudor apartment house on Brattle Street?s northeast sidewalk, he would have scored a direct hit on the command post of all that he hated. For here was sequestered the platoon specially assembled to propel America?s taste in consumer goods to heretofore unimagined pinnacles of materialism --in surroundings slyly disguised as heritage of the past.

And here stalked --at once Impresario, Pygmalion and Svengali of his brave new world of material well-being --the redoubtable, the nonpareil, indeed the Master of his universe, the incomparable Benjamin C. Thompson.

http://66.230.220.70/images/post/subway/0010.jpgPhoto: John Goodman, Design Magazine, 1983.

?Probably no other architect of his time did more to change the face of America than Benjamin C. Thompson.? --Robert Campbell

Founding-partner-fresh-out-of-school of The Architects Collaborative starring Walter Gropius, wizard of Design Research, sower of the Harvest Restaurant and a half-dozen others of its ilk, Ben?s greatest creation by far was that delirious concoction of tanned faces and sleek bodies, medjool dates and smoothies, pushcarts and boutiques, jugglers and clowns, baguettes and baklava that a phrasemaker in Rouse?s front office eventually dubbed the Festival Marketplace. And the first one was conceived and sprang upon a world panting for the future of retailing right here in Boston! (?that ongoing architectural hotspot?)

(A cynic would see that Thompson was a running dog for the kitsch of Martha Stewart. To go from one to the other, you just had to switch the source of your draperies to Liberty of London.)

I can?t tell you exactly how adrenaline smells, but like a dog, I have the ability to sense it in the air --and Ben?s basement platoon positively reeked of adrenaline. Minions arrayed in rows anxiously awaited Ben to meander --or his wife Jane to stalk-- down the aisle between the drafting tables.

Jane sometimes bore pink slips, but with personable Ben came his latest inspirations: grains of sand to be dutifully documented in words and drawings, then assembled secretarially into ring binders full of shalts and shalt-nots arranged by topic. After thousands of pages of words and sketches, a mountain emerged from those grains of sand, and it penetrated the clouds.

What was coming into focus dwarfed even today?s building or zoning codes in magnitude and thoroughness. Nothing was left to chance, for here was Ben?s blueprint for the cosmos. It was the concept ? the dream ? THE VISION. And Ben was the prophet.

By imagining the future, Ben was simultaneously creating it.

He conjured it directly out of his fastidious brain. And he invited us to join him in its cultivated confines.

The future: its defining characteristic would not be flying cars or jet packs, nor sky bridges between the 100th stories of buildings, nor even African-American presidents presiding over a nation of straight and gay mixed couples. No, the defining characteristic of the future would be that ? EVERYBODY WOULD HAVE GOOD TASTE!!

All corkscrews would be Italian and demonstrate different obscure principles of physics.

There would be no borrowed glory, no formica that tried to look like marble, or vinyl aping walnut.

No Bordeaux would be quaffed before its time, and the Mouton Cadet would come out only when folks were too sloshed to notice.

There would be no chains, or at most small local chains?

* * *

It was an awful lot for James Rouse to swallow and digest, and often he gagged. It required constant renewal of his faith, constant stoking of the fires of belief, and a deaf ear to the constantly-expressed expertise of his marketing guys.

He?d agreed to the concept in a rash moment; he had turned his back on the experience that told his developer?s mind that you couldn?t turn this expiring, fly-infested, third-world, semi-wholesale meat market into a runaway moneymaker. He didn?t know what had gotten into him, and he wished he could back out of it or at least do a shopping center the way he knew how to do a shopping center.

This chimera of Thompson?s, this bubble?

He liked historic buildings to be saved as much as the next guy, but not on his investors? ticket.

Though Ben wasn?t really born with the gift of a golden tongue, he saw to it that everyone who worked for him could draw like an angel. That helped sell his ideas. For the official poster, Carlos Diniz produced a rendering so breathtakingly detailed that it rivaled ?Where?s Waldo?? You could find it somewhere on the walls of nearly every young architect?s apartment in the year leading up to the opening.

Rouse knew you couldn?t implement an artist?s notion till you?d tamed it with plentiful helpings of common sense and business know-how. It was only thus he had allowed himself to develop Columbia, Maryland, once a fantastic pipedream that you could build a walkable new community --in the second third of the Twentieth Century!

He had fixed that one with parking lots, but he sometimes wondered if it had been worthwhile financially or if he would have made just as much or more money with a development less hamstrung by notions of design. Then he looked at his wall of plaques and certificates from planning societies and universities ? and all those invitations to lecture ?

(Truth is, however: if not for the overdesigned sign posts and traffic lights, you might not know today in Columbia that you were in a place that was supposed to be different and utopian.)

But this Thompson: on many matters that impacted the budget, he simply refused to budge. He had this concept?

* * *

When my family moved to Boston from the Midwest, I found a city of mystery, slightly grim but boundlessly explorable. It promised a reprise of the happy months I?d scouted nooks and crannies of Paris as a child of the Metro. I was sort of an urban spelunker.

In Boston, there were sun-dappled sidewalks to explore beneath screeching trains, streetcars that ran in tunnels, vast, dirty, glass-vaulted sheds for transferring from subways to buses at Dudley and Sullivan, electric buses that whooshed recklessly underground into Harvard station; and the station names rang euphonious with now dimly-remembered places: Boylston/Essex, Winter/Summer/Washington, State/Milk/Devonshire, Haymarket/Union/Friend (Union/Friend [!]), Everett, Thompson Square, City Square, Devonshire, Dover, Northampton, Dudley, Egleston, Massachusetts, Mechanics? Mechanics [!]

At night, the fishing fleet bobbed like an algae bloom in the basin between Long and Commercial Wharves. Bars abounded, well-patronized by uniformed sailors who were mostly as they should be on shore leave: drunk. Military police patrolled in Jeeps.

And once I personally observed what I thought happened only in movies: a door burst open with a blast of light, beer fumes and loud laughter; and propelled by a burly bouncer with one hand on the seat of his pants the other on the scruff of his neck, a rag-doll sailor performed a perfectly elliptical trajectory through the air to land upon his sacrum among the cobbles.

It seemed it was always raining.

The south side of Long Wharf was solid to the pier line with ramshackle residences, two stories, yellow-tin-clad and enlivened with window-box geraniums (damned if they didn?t all have them!). I think some of the fishermen lived there.

There was City Square and its police station, filled with the screech of the Elevated and the promise of late-night crime?

And there was Quincy Market. My guilty pleasure was to sneak through the spring-loaded flapping wood doors into the temple of gloom. There, lit by naked light bulbs and unhinged fluorescents, sporadic carcasses in various states of disassembly hung from hooks along the nave. Vertical strips of heavy transparent vinyl did little to deter the flies from their feasting and other functions.

http://66.230.220.70/images/post/subway/0020.jpg
Market before Thompson and Rouse.

At most a third of the stalls were occupied. The owner?s names were emblazoned on professionally hand-painted signs, and they would slice off pieces of the carcass to suit your needs. Prices were lower than the Stop and Shop, and restaurants bought here.

At noon, the men trooped off to Durgin-Park in their bloody aprons.

* * *

Periodic suggestions were made to level Quincy Market. The area needed parking, and that seemed like a logical place. At that time there was even a down ramp from the elevated expressway; here a parking lot would have made good money. I think someone tried a fire but, uninformed, the firemen got there too soon and put it out.

Architects and historians could see the buildings were priceless underneath the grime and neglect: solid granite and masonry in the finest Greek Revival style. Ben Thompson decided this would be his project. He got Rouse on board, because that old softie had public-spirited aspirations; he somewhat resembled Charles Coburn.

Then as now, the Boston area was full of architects. They hung around because the city had architecture both old and new. The new stuff turned them on even more than the old; Boston was a place of pilgrimage for the world?s architects. Though pilgrims came from Copenhagen, Helsinki, Stockholm and Milan to gawk at Boston?s modern monuments by Sert, Pei, Corbu, Rudolph, Kallmann, Saarinen, Gropius and Aalto, Boston?s local boys were staunchly Eurocentric. They could see that City Hall was La Tourette, Christian Science merely cut-rate Chandigarh, and that Kresge was really by Nervi.

Not least among the Europhiles was Thompson. He packed D/R with stuff from Milan and Helsinki and plotted the transformation of American taste. The future held double-expressos in place of Maxwell House, camembert instead of Velveeta and Bass Ale where there had been Bud. Salads in Ben?s restaurants were dressed in vinegar and oil; no goopy ranch dressing to be found. Oh, and where?s the iceberg? Look Honey, there?s no iceberg in our salad, just stuff that looks like dandelions or something?

In Cambridge and parts of Boston, folks were already hip. They knew that persimmon, olive and other ?designer? colors weren?t cool, they preferred the Door Store or even Goodwill for their furniture, and they drove wheezy or ?practical? Swedish cars. When it came to beverages, they had discovered both St. Pauli Girl and Chateuneuf-du-Pape.
Problem was: they had no place to congregate to worship their newfound consumer credo, no place to flash their Movados and flaunt their sheepskin jackets.

Enter Ben Thompson.

He had a concept.

And it dovetailed perfectly with the yearnings of the hip, the preppy, the Eurocentric, the Bohemians, the educated, the tastemakers and the architects. (No one used the term at the time, but these were the folks we?ve come to know as ?yuppies.?)

Ben?s concept was elitist. He said there are folks in the know, and there are folks who are rubes. And he would set about turning the second group into the first, and he would make those folks happy while he did it, and he would make all sorts of people rich.

Annually, he would stage little demonstrations of connoisseurship at his home on the Cape. No one, but no one, ever turned down an invitation to one of his Cape Cod shindigs. So there were hundreds of people on hand, and they all got a lobster and all the bubbly they could hold. I wonder how many accidents he caused.

With the help of the ring binders full of specifications, the concept of good taste was grafted onto the three main buildings of Quincy Market.

There was a debate within the firm about what historical authenticity meant in the context of Quincy. You see, South and North Market buildings had been developed over time as numerous tiny incremental parcels with individual property lines and deeds; as a result, the master plan for these buildings was never fully realized as conceived by the original architect, Alexander Parris, in Greek Revival times.

So there were now taller buildings, a few Second Empire mansards, a little Deco and even a miniature skyscraper of about seven stories. Also, some of the arched granite shop fronts had been replaced by newfangled cast iron or steel structure that allowed more glass.

In the end, it was decided to ?restore? the buildings to a condition they had never actually seen: the architect?s original concept with uniform units. But even this concept was somewhat compromised by retention of a couple of cast iron fronts that make a nice counterpoint to all those granite arches; also, Durgin-Park was allowed to remain dirty and undisturbed --and a fire hazard.

As word got around, you wouldn?t believe the anticipatory buzz. People couldn?t wait, because they could tell that this place was going to be wholly unlike anything that had been seen before. Long before anything was open, folks swarmed over the construction site to inspect. The Holy Grail was about to be found, and Ben was the Messiah.

When it finally opened, it didn?t disappoint. It delivered even more than it had promised. Ben and his ringbound regulations had seen to that.

There wasn?t anything ordinary to be found. If there was ground beef, you?d find it in a pita.

There wasn?t anything phony to be found. If it looked like granite, it was granite. Even the coke was dispensed from fountains that eschewed the woodgrain vinyl.

There was not a backlit vinyl sign to be seen.

Except for the light troughs that lined the nave, all indoor lighting was incandescent, directed and shielded. Outdoor fixtures came straight from Tivoli Gardens, and the trees featured unseasonal Christmas lights.

All the knickknacks sold from puschcarts were interesting or handmade or both.

The bars had piano players and sleek hostesses in short skirts, and the taps dispensed Beck?s.

Girls wore sunglasses pushed up into their hair, St. Tropez-style: barrettes gazing at heaven. They all had tans, and the guys wore their Gucci loafers without socks. They hung around till midnight, whooping and staggering to the subterranean loos.

The under-thirties mobbed this place from day one. After a while, a few of their elders happened in from the suburbs. It was better than they thought.

For that final touch of authenticity and a veneer of continuity, Ben had persuaded Rouse to keep a few of the best meat dealers at subsidized rents and with sanitary glass-fronted meat lockers; ditto some cheese merchants. So you could pick up your week?s supply of filet mignon and gorgonzola.

In fact, Ben had rigged the tenant mix so you could still think of this place as a food market if you chose to. You could actually do your week?s grocery shopping here if you could afford the prices. You could even buy fruit, and there were Turks who sold spices.

A greasy spoon that had fed breakfast to the butchers was also retained, though it was made to clean up. (Can?t remember the name, except it was a woman?s first name.) Since it was the only standard American comfort food in the whole place, it seemed themed.

Out in the open just to the east of the Food Court, a little pointy-nosed guy with a severe language barrier wowed everyone with his skill at cutting dough before it went in the oven. What came out was Boston?s very first genuine French baguette and an equally pioneering croissant. The sign over the Frenchman?s head read ?Au Bon Pain.?

Where is he now, and can you get even a half-decent baguette at the chain that grew out of his efforts?

The rubes didn?t know what to make of it. They searched in vain for something familiar to eat. There were no glazed donuts, so they reluctantly sprang for a $2 chocolate croissant, and found they liked it.

As the years wore on, there got to be more rubes, and as management relaxed Ben?s rules, the Gucci crowd gradually decamped to Newbury Street, the chains moved in as the place changed hands, and I bet now there?s even woodgrain vinyl. North and South Building, at first united at upper levels by access corridors for upper level stores full of truly glitzy merchandise have lapsed into mediocrity and non-retail uses.

Now if you want to see a collection of truly obese people in Boston, you know where to go. It seems like all of West Virginia has come here to tour the sophisticated city.

Is there anything left of Ben?s vision?

Ben, the tastemeister?

And, does anyone think that there's a correlation between the tourists adopting the place (and locals considering it a tourist trap) and the fact that the overwhelming majority of retailers would find a happy home in AnyMall, USA?
What do bears do in the woods?

I think, however, that what you think is the cause may actually be the effect.

[statler]

Thanks for the history lesson ablarc. You paint a picture a vivid as any of the photos in this thread (http://www.archboston.org/community/showthread.php?p=73386#post73386).

Are there even enough local stores and chains left to fill Quincy Market even if they wanted too?

There was a debate within the firm about what historical authenticity meant in the context of Quincy. You see, South and North Market buildings had been developed over time as numerous tiny incremental parcels with individual property lines and deeds; as a result, the master plan for these buildings was never fully realized as conceived by the original architect, Alexander Parris, in Greek Revival times.

So there were now taller buildings, a few Second Empire mansards, a little Deco and even a miniature skyscraper of about seven stories. Also, some of the arched granite shop fronts had been replaced by newfangled cast iron or steel structure that allowed more glass.

1959:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3571/3376955802_4d1bb5a6e5_b.jpg

[blade_bltz]

Nowadays, does any sane person buy into a 'vision of a shining future'? (In this country, not China).

Good taste, as you've described it, is synonymous with 'Elitist', and that's on a par with 'Pinko' on the taboo scale.

Anyway, what else are the Tourists supposed to do? You think all those West Virginians can really sustain themselves on Colonial history for an entire vacation? (In this economy, what West Virginians???)

Non-rhetorical question: did legitimate tourism even exist in Boston during the post-war decades?

[ablarc]

Non-rhetorical question: did legitimate tourism even exist in Boston during the post-war decades?
What's legitimate tourism?

I assume you're excluding an excursion from Worcester to catch a show at the Old Howard.

They hadn't installed the red line of the Freedom Trail, and I'd guess many Americans would have found both North End and South End to be menacing.

There have always been folks, however, who just liked to explore cities. Boston was a good one to explore, since it had so many hidden places. Not so much anymore; it's the price you pay for big vistas and big buildings.

You want a hidden place? Seek out Ida's in the North End for a great, cheap, old-fashioned dinner. No website. Not a place a tourist would go.

What keeps them in business? Regulars.

[ablarc]

Are there even enough local stores and chains left to fill Quincy Market even if they wanted too?
Local chains Nedick's, Sharaf's and Waldorf in nearby Scollay Square, ca. 1955, click to enlarge:

http://66.230.220.70/images/post/boston1955/00 scollay square looking west nedicks sharafs waldorf.jpg

Chains went global, along with everything else. Might that be partly reversed in the future?

[Ron Newman]

With that big blank brick wall, I bet the building on the right is a theatre. Which one?

[ablarc]

^ Maybe it's just a party wall where they tore down the adjacent building?

[Beton Brut]

Thanks, ablarc, for a thoughtful, nuanced response to a couple of cast-off, snarky rhetorical questions last week.

This struck me:

Ben?s concept was elitist. He said there are folks in the know, and there are folks who are rubes. And he would set about turning the second group into the first, and he would make those folks happy while he did it, and he would make all sorts of people rich.

Rich indeed. I'm a child of the 70's, and my folks, though not rubes, spent the 6o's listening to Frank Sinatra, Dean Martin, Tony Bennett, and Jerry Vale. Their first experience with "designer goods" was likely due to Ben Thompson. So too, my ensuing love of industrial design began in the windows of Crate & Barrel, blown away by Artek (http://www.artek.fi/en/index.html) objects and furniture.

No, the defining characteristic of the future would be that ? EVERYBODY WOULD HAVE GOOD TASTE!!

Wouldn't it be nice...


Now if you want to see a collection of truly obese people in Boston, you know where to go. It seems like all of West Virginia has come here to tour the sophisticated city.

Is there anything left of Ben?s vision?

Relaxing Ben's rules clouded his vision to the point that if you squint, Quincy Market is only a mirage. It's too simple to say that the festival marketplace (as a concept) is a victim of its success. It's spawned a myriad of half-assed knock-offs, positioned as "lifestyle centers" that sell consumerism as a substitute for quality merchandise.

I've said before, my first real experience of "Architecture" was Boston City Hall. My first taste of human aspiration, of wanting to live better than my folks, was likely inside of Ben Thompson's vision. I miss it. Most Bostonians don't even know it's gone...

[ablarc]

Thanks, ablarc, for a thoughtful, nuanced response to a couple of cast-off, snarky rhetorical questions last week.
Y'welcome; didn't realize the question was snarky; thought you just wanted to hear from someone who was there.

Rich indeed. I'm a child of the 70's, and my folks, though not rubes, spent the 6o's listening to Frank Sinatra, Dean Martin, Tony Bennett, and Jerry Vale.
Coulda done worse.

Relaxing Ben's rules clouded his vision to the point that if you squint, Quincy Market is only a mirage. It's too simple to say that the festival marketplace (as a concept) is a victim of its success. It's spawned a myriad of half-assed knock-offs, positioned as "lifestyle centers" that sell consumerism as a substitute for quality merchandise.
Ain't that the truth!

My first taste of human aspiration, of wanting to live better than my folks, was likely inside of Ben Thompson's vision. I miss it. Most Bostonians don't even know it's gone...
Most Bostonians don't know it was ever here.

[Beton Brut]

...didn't realize the question was snarky...

My questions were out of frustration and a kind of despair for the half-assed city of rubes Boston is becoming. Your thoughts here set me off:

For a few years, Quincy Market would have won this poll; it would have scored ahead of Downtown, Harvard Square and (yes) Newbury Street. Now, it seems, it's strictly for tourists.

We beat up on elitists in America. There's nothing wrong with being better (or saying that you are) as long as there's a sense of inclusion, of altruism behind your assertions. Elitism doesn't necessarily lead to narcissism. It can also lead you to educate and guide. Ben Thompson's Quincy Market, ca. 1978 made Boston better. It was ambitious, and unique, and open to all. Can anyone think of a project in Boston's public realm in the past ~30 years that has equaled it?

Today Quincy Market is a cynical shadow of his vision. Anyone want a lobster plush-toy?

thought you just wanted to hear from someone who was there.

Your recollections are clearer than mine; I was nine, fascinated by Aalto's Paimio Chair (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paimio_Chair) before I could find Finland on a map. It looked nothing like the finely-made French Provincial furniture that my folks bought while Sputnik was sailing overhead...

Coulda done worse.

No Stones, or Yardbirds, or Jefferson Airplane at my house. I've caught my dad humming along to "Eleanor Rigby" and "Yesterday," though he has often referred to The Beatles as "a bunch of commies."

Most Bostonians don't know it was ever here.

I thought of saying this, and felt judgmental. Sometimes it doesn't feel good to be right.

[ablarc]

We beat up on elitists in America. There's nothing wrong with being better (or saying that you are) as long as there's a sense of inclusion, of altruism behind your assertions. Elitism doesn't necessarily lead to narcissism. It can also lead you to educate and guide.
If you think about it, aren't all teachers elitists trying to get others into the elite? You could say, "Who the hell does this guy think he is, trying to 'improve me'?"; or you could say, "teach me what you know that I don't know."

Today Quincy Market is a cynical shadow of his vision. Anyone want a lobster plush-toy?
It happened gradually; a demonstration of entropy. It was Ben's rules that made it the good thing it was. When those were loosened...

[ablarc]

Nowadays, does any sane person buy into a 'vision of a shining future'?
Barack Obama?

The folks who voted for him?

("Hope" and "change"?)

[czsz]

In the early 90s when my parents first visited Boston they returned home to the Great Lakes a-twitter about the market and Au Bon Pain and Crate & Barrel and the sophistication of Boston. I guess it still had the power to enchant the uninitiated, then.

The city's design/culture-industrial complex seems to have rested on its laurels from that era. You no longer find Boston on any chic travelers' to-do lists. It's at best a repository for trends that have already played out in places like New York and LA. It dazzles only those who have never emerged from Vermont.

[ablarc]

Boston has lost its dynamism, and it's getting drab.

When I get a few days off to go visit a city, I'm generally drawn to New York.

Boston needs to revitalize its spirit; it's a sad thing when its biggest draw is Cheers.

.

[czsz]

Even Cheers (at least, the original Bull & Finch) is closing (or is already closed).

[Ron Newman]

Huh? I read that they laid off a bartender or two, but not that they are closing.

[czsz]

Oh, whoops. The headline read "for Boston institution, closing credits roll"...I didn't realize the institution was the bartender himself!

[kennedy]

Boston has lost its dynamism, and it's getting drab.

When I get a few days off to go visit a city, I'm generally drawn to New York.

Boston needs to revitalize its spirit; it's a sad thing when its biggest draw is Cheers.

.

Yes.

[belmont square]

Boston has lost its dynamism, and it's getting drab.

When I get a few days off to go visit a city, I'm generally drawn to New York.

Boston needs to revitalize its spirit; it's a sad thing when its biggest draw is Cheers.

.

A little spirit revitalization wouldn't hurt, but you've gone a bit far with this post. Cheers is not the biggest, or even a big draw. The city is not drab compared to what it looked like when I arrived in 1994, as numerous neighborhoods have been gentrified and seen their 19th century housing stock restored. The city is more diverse than it has ever been, both in terms of overall makeup of the city and the faces one sees on the subway and streets of the central business district.

As much of a booster of Boston as I am, I'd visit NYC over Boston about 10 times to 1. Then again, NYC is 10 times larger than Boston so I'm not sure that's much of an indictment. If you were choosing San Diego or Houston or Seattle than I guess I'd be more concerned.

[czsz]

I think the city was drab in a different way in 1994. It was still a tiny bit gritty then. So much of central Boston has been power-washed to death since. Now its drabness is the drabness of a mauve, antiseptic hospital wall - a fitting metaphor for a city that is increasingly banking on biotech.

It's become way more diverse but so little of that diversity touches the city center - at least, beyond Downtown Crossing. "Majority-minority" Boston is, for the most part, sequestered in the "gray areas" below the South End that the T serves as poorly as the RER serves the suburbs of Paris.

As much of a booster of Boston as I am, I'd visit NYC over Boston about 10 times to 1. Then again, NYC is 10 times larger than Boston so I'm not sure that's much of an indictment. If you were choosing San Diego or Houston or Seattle than I guess I'd be more concerned.

This is all very true, but there are cities in Europe that are Boston's size (or much smaller than Boston) that pack plenty of big cultural punch. Why is Copenhagen such a design center, and not Boston, for example? Visitors come, are surprised by the lack of innovation (the kind that doesn't involve test tubes or circuit boards) or vivacity on the streets, wonder about the bewilderment caused here by modes of expression like innocent street art, and ask me, rhetorically, "this is a university city?"

[belmont square]

A much more defensible critique!

I too miss the lost grit in sections of the city center, but since I live in Eastie now I have enough to spare in my own hood. Again, probably as a function of where I live, the city's new diversity seems to be all around me--and my tiny island of a neighborhood is served well by a rapid transit line (5 subway stations).

I wish Boston could do more to mimic the energy of Copenhagen and other medium sized European cities. According to those with longer memories than me on this board, at one time we were the envy of many of these places. I'm not sure how much EU citizenship has changed mobility over there, but my guess is that leaving Denmark for another European country is still (for reasons of logistics and national pride) a more difficult choice for a Copenhagen native than for a metro-Boston native considering a move to NYC or SF.

I'd also be interested to learn how we compare with places like Lyon or Manchester, cities that are located within 250 miles of a truly world class mega-city (Paris and London, respectively, with NYC for us) within their own nation. Are these places better at keeping their local creative and entrepreneurial talent from decamping to the BIG CITY than we are?

[Justin7]

Boston has lost its dynamism, and it's getting drab.

When I get a few days off to go visit a city, I'm generally drawn to New York.

Boston needs to revitalize its spirit; it's a sad thing when its biggest draw is Cheers.

.

The people who come to Boston to see Cheers are the same people who go to NYC to see Times Square and CATS.

[underground]

Oh look! Another thread devolving into idiotic Boston bashing. Again, I'd love to see some evidence that isn't anectodal, because the big picture is much different than what's being presented here. I mean seriously, a guy from out of town who thinks that all Boston has to offer is Cheers is claiming that the city's drabber than it used to be. Someone's got a seriously rose colored time machine if they think that's true!

Thanks God Spring's coming. I think this board needs some serious vitamin D to get over its collective Seasonal Effectivness.

[underground]

This is all very true, but there are cities in Europe that are Boston's size (or much smaller than Boston) that pack plenty of big cultural punch. Why is Copenhagen such a design center, and not Boston, for example? Visitors come, are surprised by the lack of innovation (the kind that doesn't involve test tubes or circuit boards) or vivacity on the streets, wonder about the bewilderment caused here by modes of expression like innocent street art, and ask me, rhetorically, "this is a university city?"

Dude, this is just a rediculus statement, on a number of levels. First of all, compairing an American city to a Eurpopean city is a non-starter. It's just not gonna happen. Second, even if you were going to try, out of all American cities, Boston would rank either at or near the top. Third, I'd love to see actual data comparing Copenhagen's design industry to Boston's because I have a feeling that it'd be much smaller. Copenhagen, not to mention Denmark is general, is incredibly small population wise and Ikea alone does not make an industry (plus IKEA is Swedish). Fourth, complaining about Boston because of a precieved lack of one particular industry is pretty lame. Not every place can have ever industry, and there's absolutely zero wrong with that. Fifth, I doubt that Boston even lacks that particular industry and I'd love to see some actual data on it. There are plenty of schools churning out designers around here and there are plenty of boutiques selling local designers. I can think of at least 4 off the top of my head in the North End alone, and I'm a heterosexual male! Furthermore, that's not even counting the South End or dozens of other places in Boston and the greater Boston area. Sixth, how any one in their right mind can complain about Boston's tech boom, especially in the life sciences, is beyond me. Looking back at Boston throughout it's history, the city has boomed when its economy has shifted to new technology, and those booms in turn financed the cultural institutions that we all enjoy. Seventh, the city lacks street vivacity? REALLY? Where the hell are YOU? Not to belabor the point or call you out, but aren't you the one who was wondering why no one was in the Financial District on a Sunday afternoon? Jesus, this complaining that there's nothing to do in the city is driving me nuts. Pick up a damn Phoenix or read through the show and event listings on Lemmingtrail.

Sorry for the rant, but the board has gotten ridiculous lately. Did everyone's Xanex run out?

Also, sorry I'm a wicked horrible speller.

[ablarc]

Underground, you have a habit of putting absurd statements in people's mouths and then arguing with the absurd statements. You should stop doing that, because it's obnoxious, solipsistic, and a conversation killer.

[underground]

Why are you going ad hominim, dude? You said, "Boston has lost its dynamism, and it's getting drab," followed by, "Boston needs to revitalize its spirit; it's a sad thing when its biggest draw is Cheers," and I'm calling you out because those are patintly rediculous things to say. Simple as that. If you want to present a rebuttle, that'd be great. As for what CZ said, I responded directly to his point. If he wants to present the counter argument, that'd be great too.

[czsz]

Well, you did seem to attack me over IKEA, whereas you were the one who brought it up. I wouldn't say it really exemplifies the design industry at all, actually. My apartment is almost nothing but IKEA, but my nicest piece of furniture is a small bookshelf from Crate & Barrel (I've gotten some nicer stuff at Boston Interiors, too).

I don't see why Boston can't be compared to European cities - why not have a higher standard of excellence than Minneapolis or Dallas-Fort Worth? In fact, there are plenty of European cities that Boston is comparable. I found Hamburg to be the most Boston-like city in Europe because it's also superficially prosperous but culturally sterile - a shadow of what it was even in the 70s.

I wasn't complaining that Boston doesn't have design schools or design stores or local designers who show in them. The problem with Boston is not that it doesn't have anything, really. It's that what it does have is provincial - independent locals who haven't broken out of regional reputations, or else colonization by the branch outlets of chains. The city isn't really happening to the extent that people want to come here to soak up some new movement in...not just design, but anything. It's self-sustaining, but it's not really a draw...for anything new, that is.

And the life sciences boom is wonderful for the economy, but it doesn't really lend itself to the city's cultural scene as much as a boom in the local design industry or art world would. (Not to mention...when was the last time Genzyme and co. sponsored the city's cultural life in the way its depleting local financial institutions traditionally have?)

I read the Phoenix and the Weekly Dig and there's no doubt in my mind that plenty is going on...if you search for it. But what if you're not? After all, what great city can only be found hidden away in listings? What if you land in Boston and simply walk the streets, aimlessly? They don't have the energy they used to.

[ablarc]

all Boston has to offer is Cheers
You said it, I didn't.

[commuter guy]

I found Hamburg to be the most Boston-like city in Europe because it's also superficially prosperous but culturally sterile - a shadow of what it was even in the 70s.

I can see your point regarding Hamburg. Do you think the reunification of Germany and the resurgence of Berlin's status again has had any impact on Hamburg?

[czsz]

A little bit; Berlin attracted a lot of the we're-militant-artists-let's-occupy-an-old-building-and-not-pay-rent crowd, but it stole these from a lot of German cities equally. I met a girl once on the train from Luebeck to Berlin and she said that the reunification of Berlin had "liberated" German youths from the idea that their country had no metropolis like Paris, London, and New York. "We were all stuck in places with 300,000 people, places like Mannheim," she said. I asked her about Hamburg and she said she never thought it served as a substitute, despite its size. Her reply: "Hamburg has always been dark, boring, and industrial".

That's not entirely true. The Reeperbahn was once a red light district that rivaled Amsterdam and a nightspot that cradled the Beetles. Berlin may have stolen away its top spot on the music scene, but the prostitution and stripteases died on their own. Incidentally, its presence petered out around the same time as Boston's Combat Zone.

Hamburg feels like it started lacking vision well before the Berlin Wall fell - as if it's frozen in time circa 1983. I get this feeling in Boston, too, particularly when taking the T or gazing on the skyline. So much done since then is really background; it lacks the boldness to define the city. Even the Big Dig was a plan conceived in the early 80s.

Oh, and did I mention that Hamburg has a Seaport District? It's called "Hafen City" it's got many of the same problems as Boston's (unimaginative architecture, large footprints). The one saving grace is Hamburg's ICA, a majestic concert hall that's set to grace the roof of an old warehouse.

[underground]

You said it, I didn't.

I think you just outed yourself as the trial lawyer who thought up Bill Clinton's "That Depends on the what the Meaning of Is, Is" defense. Yes, saying that Cheers is Boston's biggest draw and saying that Cheers is all Boston has to offer are in fact different sentances. However, are you really going to argue that the point behind them is different?

As to CZ's points, Boston being superficially prosperous and Boston not being a big draw, again, I think the big picture evidence goes against what you may be anecdotaly experiencing. The biggest single counter argument is the fact that, although the entire world is going through an economic down turn second only to the great depression, Boston has not had nearly as big a slump, and in fact will probably come out ahead of many places that had previously led it economically after the markets have straightened themselves out. If Boston was "superficially prosperous," I don't think that would be the case. As to Boston not being a big draw, we've got new life science, high tech, and movie industry jobs poping up all over the state, we've got hotels all over the place charging $300, $500, and $1,000 a night, and we've got fucking duck boats all over our streets. Sound like people are coming here. If there's anything going on, it's that more people want to come to Boston than we currently have space for. I mean, you can't tell me that I'm paying $1,500 a month to live in a closet because no one else would take the space!

As for why you can't compare American and European cities: history, government, tastes, economics, politics, geography, lifestyle... the list of differences go on and on. Looking at a European city and asking, "Why aren't we like that?" has an answer that could fill an encyclopedia.

As for Boston night/street life somehow being inferior because it's hard to find... I don't know what to tell you, dude. I've certainly never felt that way, and I can't seem to find too much sympathy for people making that argument. Looking in the newspaper isn't hard. Looking on the internet isn't hard. If you wandered down the street in Potzdamer Platz you'd have the same problem as if you wandered down the street in Kendall Sq. (although Kendall Sq. has it's awesome movie theatre, the Hungry Mother, Cambridge Brewing Co., etc.). You just can't go everywhere and expect everything. Allston is crawling with nightlife. So is most of Cambridge, parts of Somerville, Northern Brookline, Hyde Sq. and Centre St in JP, Mission Hill, the Fenway (and not just Landsdowne St.), the Back Bay is crammed with stuff all along Boylston (with some real sleeper hits off of the side streets like the Last Drop), Beacon Hill is of course a destination, as is the North End, and, I mean, this list could go on and on. Right now, we've probably got a better local music scene that we did in the 80s and 90s with places like PAs Lounge, the Midway Cafe, Great Scott, the Middle East, TT the Bears, the new House of Blues, Limelight Studio (not just Kareoke anymore), Charlie's is doing live music, O'Brien's Pub... and that's not even getting into any number of illegal venues (not that I know anything about them, ask a punk for directions). I'm gonna stop here because I'm rambling, but there is not a lack of entertainment and culture in Boston.

[ablarc]

I wouldn't consider anything in the North End "destination shopping" in the way these other areas are.

Charles Street used to be known as a destination for antique shopping, but I'm not sure it still is.

But niche shopping isn't the same as destination shopping, either. If I want to buy Indian groceries, Union Square in Somerville is currently my best bet - but I'd hardly go there for general shopping.
So ... what's the difference?

[czsz]

I think it's pretty clear from that sequence that destination shopping districts compel people to come from afar to do more general purchasing than they could achieve in a niche shopping district. If you only go there because of the antique stores, it doesn't count.

Underground - I think you're moving past my points rather than addressing them. You can cite all the visitor numbers and economic statistics you want, but that does not mean people are visiting Boston to soak up something new. A Duck Boat trundling past the city's colonial monuments is not what I would consider a good example of Boston being a vital city pulsating with excitement. Neither is a sterile lab. This is what I meant by Boston being superficially prosperous. The city is wealthy. Tourists come. But that wealth is rarely reinvested into some kind of new cultural capital, and the tourists aren't flocking to see anything that wasn't built over at least a half-century ago.

Similarly, your cataloguing of bars, clubs, and what have you doesn't speak to Boston's nighttime gestalt. Maybe the city's nightlife is just too spread out, maybe it just cloisters indoors, but having been to both Kendall Sq. and Potsdamer Platz, it boggles me how you can compare the vitality of their respective streets - one is a ghost town, even on summer nights, while the other is teeming. Boston should be more than the sum of its parts. Those parts should be contributing to a larger sense of urban vibrancy. At night, in Boston, they don't.

I don't really see why Boston, which compares itself so frequently to cities in Europe, can't be held to their standards of creativity or fun. Does Copenhagen have a more productive design scene because it's several hundred years older? Then why doesn't Hamburg?

Ablarc and others have testified to Boston's ability to compete with such places a mere three decades ago. I have to wonder whether New York's renaissance drained Boston; I have the feeling this city attracted a lot of the productive people who were scared away from Manhattan by "Taxi Driver" levels of crime and deterioration.

[underground]

Sorry, I completely don't understand your point about tourism. Are you saying that it's not a sign of a city's vibrancy because people only come to see old things? First of all, I'm sure plenty of people come to Boston and never see an old thing. I know that'd be pretty hard to do, but how many people come into town to see sports and go shopping, or go to a conference and eat in a restraunt? Second, even if all anyone ever did was visit the Paul Revere House, how is that a sign of a lack of vitality?

I also don't get your point about Boston's night time lacking urban vibrancy. It's too spread out? Okay, so I'll try and work geographically naming clusters of night life: Davis Sq., Harvard Sq., Central Sq., Union Sq., North Station, Beacon Hill, the North End, Downtown Crossing (I know this'll be controversial but, The Orpheum, The Opera House, The Last Hurrah, Silvertone, Max and Dylans, Fajitas and 'Ritas, The huge Lowes Movie Theatre, Teatro, Lime Light Studio, the Tam, Intermission Tavern, etc. are all down there), Boylston St (Back Bay), Boylston St (the Fenway), Brookline Ave and Lansdowne St., Mission Hill, Hyde Sq., Centre St. (JP), South Boston, Coolidge Corner, Washington Sq (Brookline), Allston, Brighton Ctr... this list goes on and on and I'm sure others can think of some that I can't think of. All of these areas have clusters of night life, and some of them are pretty big.

As for your point about Boston competing with other cities 30 years ago, first, it wasn't, and second, now it is. Now matter how rosy a picture the old photos posted here paint, the fact of the matter is that people were leaving the city by the thousands because it was a rotting hulk. Today, so many people want to live here that we have the highest housing costs of any place in the US that isn't New York or San Fran.

[czsz]

Maybe prosperity of the kind you're describing is part of the problem. Bostonians like Ben Thompson had to be creative 30 years ago to lure people to the city. Today, there's much more complacency. Maybe part of the problem is also that Boston drew (and draws) too many consumers of creative goods than their producers.

I know this'll be controversial but, The Orpheum, The Opera House, The Last Hurrah, Silvertone, Max and Dylans, Fajitas and 'Ritas, The huge Lowes Movie Theatre, Teatro, Lime Light Studio, the Tam, Intermission Tavern, etc. are all down there

More cataloguing. My question is: why does DTC still feel so dead at night, walking around, despite all these places? Odd, isn't it?

I'll stop whining about nightlife if you refrain from the opposite extreme. Mission Hill and Hyde Square as hotspots? Really?

And let's not forget to mention Boston's absurd closing times and the utter impossibility of finding any bar without a TV tuned to NESN. And the cancellation of the Night Bus thing. Jesus, such little changes could make this city so much better.

[underground]

More cataloguing. My question is: why does DTC still feel so dead at night, walking around, despite all these places? Odd, isn't it?

I'll stop whining about nightlife if you refrain from the opposite extreme. Mission Hill and Hyde Square as hotspots? Really?

And let's not forget to mention Boston's absurd closing times and the utter impossibility of finding any bar without a TV tuned to NESN. And the cancellation of the Night Bus thing. Jesus, such little changes could make this city so much better.

Personally, I don't think DTX is dead at night at all, and I think if people actually spent some time there instead of repeating the conventional wisdom and what they read in the Globe, then they'd realize it. Also, Mission Hill and Hyde Square are night spots. Even without the Milky Way (a victim of the areas popularity, as well as it's own), Hyde Sq. still has a lot of stuff. Downtown, it ain't, but for a small periferal neighborhood it's great (Brendham Behan is a personal favorite of mine and always has good DJ nights). As for finding a bar without NESN, first, I'm not sure why bars showing NESN is a bad thing, second, if you can't find a bar without NESN you're not looking hard enough, and three, if you were in New York it would just be replaced by YES because, guess what, bars in every city in the US show sports on TV. Loss of the Night Owl is a legitimate gripe. Early closing times are weird, but I've heard this complaint for so long that it's getting tired. Try going out earlier.

[czsz]

I'm not sure why bars showing NESN is a bad thing

It's not. It's bad when there's no variety because every bar has a giant TV with sports on it. I don't mind that most bars show The Game, but if Boston is such a cosmopolitan city, why can't at least one or two not? Believe me, I've looked. The Game shows up in the most illogical places - even bars striving for sophistication here can never resist. That doesn't happen in New York. I'm hardly the only one to comment on this.

Try going out earlier.

Sidewalks rolling up early is practically the definition of provincialism.

[underground]

If you need help finding a variety of bars, I'd suggest Yelp.com.

Also, I think we could all stand to think twice when we use the phrase provincial to describe Boston. I know it's popular and part of the current conventional wisdom, but it's not a reflection of reality (and I'm not even sure how sidewalks rolling up early is anything nearing the definition of provincialism). It's time to leave the 70s and join the rest of us in the future. I mean, just think about the rediculousness of calling a majority minority city provincial! Is Sam Yoon provincial? Is Felix Arroyo provincial? Is Union Sq. provincial? Is East Boston provincial? Are all the university and college students provincial? Are the people who move to Boston to work in our hospitals provincial?

Update: I Googled "No TV," Bar, and Boston and found out that City Bar has no TVs in it's lounge. Estimated time spent figuring this amazing fact out: 5 seconds.

[BostonObserver]

Why do so many conversations about Boston end with 'Boston sucks because I can't get a drink at 4 am'. czsz you really come across as hating Boston, are you incarcerated because I can't figure you why you don't move. And don't say I just want Boston to be better because you really do seem angry.

[kennedy]

Cz has always seemed very pessimistic to me, but that doesn't mean he hates Boston or something. He just doesn't use euphemisms when describing how he thinks Boston sucks. He actually contributes a good share of the good ideas the come up on this forum. My guess he's as frustrated as everyone else here. Or I'm totally wrong and he loves the Yankees, the Giants, and that goofy-ass red chowder stuff.

And yeah, Boston does suck because I probably won't be able to get a drink at 4am (in a few years when I'm 21, of course.)

[czsz]

BostonObserver, I think you answered your own question. If I hated Boston so much, why wouldn't I move? Why would I bother visiting this forum, filled with a bunch of Boston enthusiasts? Of course I'm trying to use criticism to improve this place. I do, however, get frustrated when the locals don't even want to acknowledge certain problems.

It's interesting to see these patterns repeat themselves on other discussion fora. Look how these Philadelphians put down superior Boston in order to feel better about themselves: http://www.city-data.com/forum/philadelphia/306301-philadelphia-vicinity-boring-second-rate.html

At the same time, I think there's a mentality defined by uninformed but prevalent criticisms like these: http://curbed.com/archives/2005/10/28/curbed_readers_write_fuck_boston_edition.php ; http://gawker.com/284166/does-boston-actually-suck-more-than-dc . I don't see why Boston should not work hard to dispel them - and, clearly, defensiveness is not going to work as much as improving the first impressions of outsiders.

[ablarc]

Early in this thread, garbibre said everything worth saying:


All still have grocery stores?

... Many ... could be malls in the 'burbs for all I care.

What about the other, sometimes smaller, less touristy neighborhood commercial zones, some of which have been invoked by others here--Chinatown, Fields Corner, Mattapan Square, Roslindale Square, Central in JP? Cleveland Circle? Many of these are far more worthy and interesting than the Copley Place Mall.

Hanover Street would be on my list, too, because it was for the neighborhood, then developed into a tourist destination--not engineered as a tourist destination like Quincy Market or Copley (or the Pru?).

Newbury has changed from when I was kid, too. It was a mix of 'high(er)' end shopping and 'funky' for locals--often small, locally-owned establishments--as opposed to now, where it seems like a shopping magnet for tourists with money who can go to too many of these establishments in any city, anywhere in the world. Yawn.

Charles Street almost fits my criteria (still?) and could be a worthy choice.

It's probably all too different now; I haven't lived there since the 80s. Coolidge, Harvard Street, and I know Harvard Square have been infiltrated by more (too many?) chains.

However, understand that I don't disparage the chains, until they become a majority of businesses in a neighborhood.

Anything that seems catered to attracting tourists is suspect. Even 1976 to the present Quincy Market, which would be suspect, lost whatever made it unique within its first five years of re-invention. (Now, old Quincy Market--that was GRIT! However, I am not going to get into that side discussion again here.)

The Pru, Copley, and even Downtown Crossing are all destination 'malls' and, seemingly, not intended for residents. That's why Downtown Crossing has become a failure. Office workers treat it like the mall, which is fine for the daytime. However, they ignore it at night, along with the locals AND the tourists. (Plus, all the stupid gits quoted in the article recently posted about re-opening its traffic should give you a prime indication why it's a failure.)...

I've had this argument here before. Shopping/retail is to serve the locals. If commercial businesses, of all types, become of interest to those outside the neighborhood, that's great, but shouldn't be its prime goal.
As ckb said elsewhere (http://www.archboston.org/community/showthread.php?p=74548#post74548), "Is there a hardware store?"

[cden4]

I'm curious as to why Newbury St is winning this poll. I walked down it the other day and there were maybe 2 stores out of the whole stretch that interested me in any way. On the other hand, I find myself shopping in Downtown Crossing on a regular basis. I have no need for overpriced upscale crap. I want reasonably priced clothing, books, etc. I find myself in Macy's, TJMaxx, DSW, and Borders more often than pretty much any other store. In terms of a vibrant street, Newbury St wins out because of the sheer number of pedestrians and sidewalk cafes. I could do without the people showing off their decked-out cars and people double parking, causing much gridlock and honking.

[ablarc]

^ I think you answered your own question in your second-to-last sentence.