New York Revisited

September 4th, 2006 · Filed under: Rav's Log

No Comments · Print This Article

I first came to New York when I was 18, and I can honestly say being there was the most exciting thing that had ever happened to me. A few visits while I was studying in Boston didn’t exactly change my mind. But that was before I lived in London. Surely, I thought, couple of years in the original City At The Centre Of The Modern World would take some of the shine off the current City At The Centre Of The Modern World?

So, in the midst of an epic tube-train-flight-monorail-train-bus-tube journey from London back to Boston on Monday, I decided to have a pootle around and see how I felt in the city.

Things Which, Having Lived in London, I Still Think Are Loads Better In New York:

The cars. For a long, long time, in the 1990’s, we in Europe had much, much better looking cars. Assertively-curvy numbers like the Corsa and Ford’s “Edge” styling, a la Focus; and great little sportsters like the Alfa Spider. The Americans, by contrast, seemed on a mission to bland every last drop of character out of their cars, despite a super-rich heritage of big, can’t-ignore-em motors. Now, it’s all turned around - with every striking curve or angle in European cars being replaced by a succession of vague waves, it’s dull-a-go-go for us, but the yanks have got their grooves back. Of course, if there’s been a rise in the confidence level of the US car industry, that’s probably extremely bad news, from a let’s-not-all-die-of-climate-change perspective. But, you know, I’m on holiday.

The hipster/club/media-twat scene. Call it what you will. You know what I’m talking about. It involves trilbys and records with wilfully dated-sounding keyboards. Now, in my visits to New York and my time in London I haven’t exactly been a mainstay of the cool set. But it doesn’t take much scanning to see the balance of power, with half of Manhattan as well as Williamsburg covered in flyers for a variety of odd nights, frequently involving poetry, film or even “performance art.” And in London, hipsters have to take over traditional-sounding pubs, called things like the George & Dragon, and bend them to their own needs. In New York, you just take over an empty space and throw arty shit all over it, leaving you with places with hard-wired hipness and names like Welcome To The Johnsons. I’m not saying anything about quality, but when it comes to quantity, New York wins hands down. Again, whether you think this is a good thing is up to you.

Free papers. Ye gods! When will London get a decent free weekly? The London Line came and went, the Penny seems to be written by illiterate sixth-formers… admitedly, there’s a healthy fight going on on the daily scene, with horrible Daily Mail hegemony of Standard Lite and London Lite being challenged by The London Paper, which I haven’t seen yet. But a good weekly - with young-centred news, good arts coverage, and free listings - just won’t take off. And yet in New York, there’s (big breath): The Village Voice, AM, The New York Press, Downtown, GayCity, and the New York Blade, which is also gay. That’s right: six free weeklies, two just for us gays - and London can’t manage one for everyone! Unless you count bloody TNT, I suppose (are Australians, maligned, common in bar work, and increasingly in the media, the New Gays?)

Things Which, Having Lived in London, I Think Are, On Balance, Probably Just as Good There:

The food. Now, look, this is a big deal. Those who know me know my affinity with a place is very, very tied up with the food there. Part of my stock everything-is-so-much-better-in-America rant has always been the availability there - and particularly in New York - of cheap, varied, delicious, quality fast food, 24hrs a day. I’m not talking about McDonald’s (although I admit that the milkshakes in the US, which I’ve long maintained are superior to the UK’s because of the inclusion of real fruit bits, are in fact inferior because of being vastly oversweetened and twice the price). I’m talking about heros, subways, deli sandwiches, salad bars, and the like.

Now, I’d argue that when I first came to the US in 1998, that was true. But a lot’s changed in London since then. Subway has reminded people that sandwiches are much nicer if you see the person put them together, and that’s starting to spread out from the quaint, overpriced sandwich shops of Clerkenwell to later-opening, modern establishments. Sushi, smoothies, and soup bars have all infiltrated the market. And, if you know where to look, London is full of dirt-cheap bargain options, like Islington and Fitzrovia’s much-loved three-quid thai buffets.

What’s more, I’m forced to admit that New York food isn’t actually as cheap as I remember. Granted, conversion is tricky, as the actual rate - almost $2 to a pound - doesn’t resemble the ratio of wages and so on. Admittedly, thanks to my work on Brass Tacks: Africa, I do understand what purchasing power parity is now. But I’m not going to start calculating deli rates. Suffice to say, in London you can get a decent, satisfying sandwich for 3 quid. Add a drink and crisps, 4.50. In New York, the equivalent is going to be $5 before the drink and crisps, and $7-8 with - no better (although you could probably skip the crisps, as the sandwhich is probably bigger). Plus, if you’re on a budget, London offers healthier options - those 99p tuna or egg sandwiches from supermarkets may be soul-destryong, but they’re a lot better for you than the egg ‘n’ cheese bagels from Dunkin’ Donuts that are about all you can get for $2 to eat here (and, OK, are delicious).

The transport. OK, the subway is cheaper, and it runs all night. But have you seen the map? OK, sure, coverage is good - there’s a bare area in Queens, but nothing like the huge, Hackney-sized gap in the Underground network (see it in top right? Oh, by the way, I live there). And of course, London leaves half the city - the bit below the river - almost tubeless. But a quick comaparison of the two maps shows up the real problem with New York’s - it’s linear, linear, linear. While London’s outward prongs serve the central hub of the circle line, and penetrate deep into the heart of the city. NY’s lines sidle along together, like strangers on an airport travelaor, occasionally brushing up against each other. Just look at the routes the B/D and 4 lines take up through the Bronx. Cahm Aaaahn! This is the 21st Century - it’s all about integration. NY needs to work on that. As it is, it takes far longer to get from, say, Yankee Stadium to Prospect Park than to get from Wembly all the way over to Brixton.

What’s more, in London buses are a real, viable transport option, instead of just a mirage designed to keep black people off the tube. Can someone please explain to me why in London, where the bus costs less than half as much as the tube, do you see all kinds of professionals on it, while in New York, where it costs the same as the Subway, it seems to be ridden exclusively by downtrodden-looking poor people? I guess the professionals are all in Taxis. I’ll admit they’re much cheaper stateside. But you have to tip, dammit.

So who wins? Way too soon to tell. This is all just based on a two-hour survey, remember. Let me spend a few days when I’m done in Boston, I’ll get back to you.

See other articles about: america, america sep 2006, boston, new york

Related Articles:- A Party for the Democratic Wing of the Democratic Party, Primary Colours, Farewell, Filene’s, An Open Letter to Jeff Jacoby