What's new
By:

Official 'What did you wear today?' Thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Deleted member 848
  • Start date Start date
NAOS said:
I wouldn't call it defensive. I'd be saying the same thing if you were ****ting on Buenos Aires or any other major metropolis; it's just a nonsensical statement. I think I'm also resistant to New York getting automatic recognition as some arts-and-culture hub.... most of the trends I see coming out of there are obnoxious... and the ascension of Brooklyn has been beyond obnoxious. The NY-as-defacto-culture-hub is an antique notion that we can't ditch because the horde of marketers are still (and probably always will be) the largest group of sycophants in human history.

Here's the thing about LA. It's never been about the clothes here. It's about the body. In NY you can be a clothes horse. Not here. Body. Second, I pretty much guarantee if you were interview every person you saw in LA who was shamelessly following a trend, you'd find that more than 80% of them have lived here less than 2 years. It's hard to condemn a city when its those people who are trolling through the "melrose shops" of LA. That'd be like condemning Las Vegas for the people in the casinos.

One of the best things about "fashion" in LA is that the place is really accepting of the weirdest **** you want to cultivate. You don't have to be sharp-dressed. Show some body, and feel good about yourself. Looking like a Brooklyn Douche is a copout.
Click to expand...

I think I spent one day, of fourteen, in Melrose. One of my friends has lived there for years, so he showed me around a ton of places-- so it's unfair to characterize my opinion as that of a person who 'trolls through Melrose'.

But sure, of course there is only so much I can see without living there. I respect your opinion, and I find your 'body' identity an interesting one (albeit one that doesn't resonate with, or interest me). Along with that, and your typical inner-city skating/hip-hop subculture (which is largely ripped off of NYC), what else do y'all got? Genuinely curious. Edmonton doesn't really have any unique fashion vibes to it, so we often poach.
 
My friend who lives in LA describes it as everything you love in life and everything you hate, all in one place.
 
Carbon13 said:
I dunno, i love San Fran. My friends from San Fran love LA. There must something about it people like. I give LA the benefit of the doubt.
Click to expand...

I think as a dude from 18-35 (can't speak to any other age demos) LA is obviously the preferable place to live-- cost of living, city vibe, the vast nature of the city-- you could live there for years, and still be constantly finding new stuff out about it.

San Fran is gorgeous, and picturesque (moreso than LA)-- but I really think the city's identity is dying as its gentrification continues.
 
dalamon said:
I think as a dude from 18-35 (can't speak to any other age demos) LA is obviously the preferable place to live-- cost of living, city vibe, the vast nature of the city-- you could live there for years, and still be constantly finding new stuff out about it.

San Fran is gorgeous, and picturesque (moreso than LA)-- but I really think the city's identity is dying as its gentrification continues.
Click to expand...

Ive heard that too. I wouldnt doubt thats true in a lot of places there. I am curious though, how has the New York arts scene survived gentrification? Surely they went through the same thing?
 
dalamon said:
I think I spent one day, of fourteen, in Melrose. One of my friends has lived there for years, so he showed me around a ton of places-- so it's unfair to characterize my opinion as that of a person who 'trolls through Melrose'.

But sure, of course there is only so much I can see without living there. I respect your opinion, and I find your 'body' identity an interesting one (albeit one that doesn't resonate with, or interest me). Along with that, and your typical inner-city skating/hip-hop subculture (which is largely ripped off of NYC), what else do y'all got? Genuinely curious. Edmonton doesn't really have any unique fashion vibes to it, so we often poach.
Click to expand...

I meant the people you're likely to see there. Not you, specifically. Also, if you'd been around other places, then all you needed to do was explain that. Was I supposed to know?

dude, to assign NY as the originator of inner-city, skate, or hip hop fashion, and thereby exclude LA, reveals a very simplistic view on the emergence of trends. These trends were never univocally New York. The fact that they're credited to New York is mainly something to laugh at. Tons of credit should go to Jamaica; some needs to go to LA; Latinos were there from the beginning, so you need to credit Puerto Rico, etc., etc. Also, a lot of these trends emerged from the pressure-cooker of a mostly ****ty situation in NY (and LA, but it wasn't as strong a voice as New York), so it's kinda weird to speak of them as beacons of genius.

I haven't been to NY in several years, and I'm probably not headed back very soon, so it's hard for me to say what LA has that is uniquely its own. In fact, I sort of hate that framing. The body issue isn't a small point, however. It's definitely the main thing that separates the places. LA has always had more of a hippy, free-flowing clothing vibe. You'll see people rock hard-used clothes in a good way. The beach communities have always been starkly different from the rest of LA in terms of fashion. I don't know what else to say. Body.
 
dalamon said:
I think as a dude from 18-35 (can't speak to any other age demos) LA is obviously the preferable place to live-- cost of living, city vibe, the vast nature of the city-- you could live there for years, and still be constantly finding new stuff out about it.

San Fran is gorgeous, and picturesque (moreso than LA)-- but I really think the city's identity is dying as its gentrification continues.
Click to expand...

but New York hasn't seen this?? c'mon dude... In terms of culture-hub status, New York is a vastly different place than it was in the 50s and 60s, when legitimately important things were happening there. Rent control died in the sixties and it's been a noticeable decline from there. This Brooklyn-era is simply the stupid way we currently celebrate gentrification.
 
NAOS said:
but New York hasn't seen this?? c'mon dude... In terms of culture-hub status, New York is a vastly different place than it was in the 50s and 60s, when legitimately important things were happening there. Rent control died in the sixties and it's been a noticeable decline from there. This Brooklyn-era is simply the stupid way we currently celebrate gentrification.
Click to expand...

c'mon dude, are we really comparing the New York metro to the pint-sized San Fransisco?

Every city has gentrification. It's attacked entire communities in NYC-- whereas it has arguably attacked the entire CITY of San Fransisco.
 
Carbon13 said:
Ive heard that too. I wouldnt doubt thats true in a lot of places there. I am curious though, how has the New York arts scene survived gentrification? Surely they went through the same thing?
Click to expand...


through size. Think of the task of gentrifying all of New York vs San Fransisco.
 
NAOS said:
I meant the people you're likely to see there. Not you, specifically. Also, if you'd been around other places, then all you needed to do was explain that. Was I supposed to know?

dude, to assign NY as the originator of inner-city, skate, or hip hop fashion, and thereby exclude LA, reveals a very simplistic view on the emergence of trends. These trends were never univocally New York. The fact that they're credited to New York is mainly something to laugh at. Tons of credit should go to Jamaica; some needs to go to LA; Latinos were there from the beginning, so you need to credit Puerto Rico, etc., etc. Also, a lot of these trends emerged from the pressure-cooker of a mostly ****ty situation in NY (and LA, but it wasn't as strong a voice as New York), so it's kinda weird to speak of them as beacons of genius.

I haven't been to NY in several years, and I'm probably not headed back very soon, so it's hard for me to say what LA has that is uniquely its own. In fact, I sort of hate that framing. The body issue isn't a small point, however. It's definitely the main thing that separates the places. LA has always had more of a hippy, free-flowing clothing vibe. You'll see people rock hard-used clothes in a good way. The beach communities have always been starkly different from the rest of LA in terms of fashion. I don't know what else to say. Body.
Click to expand...

we can agree to disagree, but the opinion of New York (which encompasses its Jamaican residents) being the birthplace of hip-hop/skate/inner-city culture is basically as widely-accepted as they come. Really don't think I'm standing on a limb here. You argue for more nuance-- maybe that's the case. Most don't seem to have the need to make that extra distinction, from what I have seen.
 
dalamon said:
c'mon dude, are we really comparing the New York metro to the pint-sized San Fransisco?

Every city has gentrification. It's attacked entire communities in NYC-- whereas it has arguably attacked the entire CITY of San Fransisco.
Click to expand...

^are we playing dodge ball now?

I'm up in the Bay Area all the time. It's sucking hard right now because it's getting pummeled by all the regrettable things that happen in a boom town. It's not just SF.... Oakland is flipping over at absolutely record-breaking pace. Berkeley, too. Etc. This all happened to Manhattan years ago. It's already happened in Brooklyn.

WHAT WAS THE ****ING POINT AGAIN?

You don't get gentrification without a place by transected by tons of people from elsewhere. Certain communities are squeezed on the margins (and they're often the authors of trends), but they're also composed of peoples from multiple places. It's sloppy and stupid to assign credit to the place and think you've explained something.

OH NVM, NY IS GENIUS.
 
NAOS said:
^are we playing dodge ball now?

I'm up in the Bay Area all the time. It's sucking hard right now because it's getting pummeled by all the regrettable things that happen in a boom town. It's not just SF.... Oakland is flipping over at absolutely record-breaking pace. Berkeley, too. Etc. This all happened to Manhattan years ago. It's already happened in Brooklyn.

WHAT WAS THE ****ING POINT AGAIN?

You don't get gentrification without a place by transected by tons of people from elsewhere. Certain communities are squeezed on the margins (and they're often the authors of trends), but they're also composed of peoples from multiple places.

OH NVM, NY IS GENIUS.
Click to expand...

...?

well, I'll close with the opinion that San Fransisco has suffered more through gentrification than New York has. Not an extreme opinion by any stretch of the imagination-- but if you disagree, then fine.
 
side note: It's crazy hearing Frank Zappa tunes where he rips on San Fran, and I'm listening to it, and I'm like "man-- all of this stuff is dead". RIP, Frank. He'd probably be furious with all of this rampant gentrification going down.

edit: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WnjufR8GDcw
 
dalamon said:
through size. Think of the task of gentrifying all of New York vs San Fransisco.
Click to expand...

I dont know, that seems overly simplistic. I would have to see a paper with data to support this.

Have you ever read joel kotkin? Hes an expert on cities. His basic tenant is cities like chicago, sf, and ny become expensive because they are too dense. Cities like phoenix and houston can actually support the middle class through suburban sprawl. I think the argument that san fran is becoming too expensive is not quite right, sf has been expensive a long, long time. Now, if you are arguing places in surrounding sf like mountain view are becoming too expensive due to the tech industry, i could agree with that.
 
dalamon said:
...?

well, I'll close with the opinion that San Fransisco has suffered more through gentrification than New York has. Not an extreme opinion by any stretch of the imagination-- but if you disagree, then fine.
Click to expand...

Please go one post further. Answer these two questions, please. Where are you pulling these arguments from? What, exactly, is your evidence?
 
Carbon13 said:
I dont know, that seems overly simplistic. I would have to see a paper with data to support this.
Click to expand...

I unfortunately have to leave in about 2 minutes here-- it was a big subject of discussion in a college course I took a year ago. I'll see if I kept the texbook when i come back home.

Have you ever read joel kotkin? Hes an expert on cities. His basic tenant is cities like chicago, sf, and ny become expensive because they are too dense. Cities like phoenix and houston can actually support the middle class through suburban sprawl.
Click to expand...

This is exactly what I've been saying-- San Fransisco is more confined than New York, so it suffers more acutely from gentrification (from what I've gathered).

I think the argument that san fran is becoming too expensive is not quite right, sf has been expensive a long, long time. Now, if you are arguing places in surrounding sf like mountain view are becoming too expensive due to the tech industry, i could agree with that.
Click to expand...

I think the argument is that San Fran has become expensive-- apart from their strong gay culture, it's hard to think of too many more contributions that the city has made since the 60s.

NAOS said:
Please go one post further. Answer these two questions, please. Where are you pulling these arguments from? What, exactly, is your evidence?
Click to expand...

from what I've learned in class-- a textbook on urban planning, and gentrification. I forget the book's title, but I still should have it, along with all of the sources it has cited.
 
Carbon13 said:
But guys, i think were missing big question here. What about Houston as a cultural hub?
Click to expand...

their biggest contribution is a source of gravity tbh-- never seen so many overweight ppl in my life.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top