The South End Is Over

Pine Street Inn Wins; Neighborhood Yuppies Crestfallen....

2008-10-29T10:45:00.000-07:00

I was very pleased to learn that the Pine Street Inn has finally acquired the Upton Street property presently known as Hope House and has not given in any further to the baseless demands of the Union Park Neighborhood Association.

For those of you who are unfamiliar with the controversy, the Pine Street Inn had been planning to purchase the property for quite some time for use as low-income housing for people who were previously homeless. Stringent guidelines for acceptance into this program have been in place and acceptees into the program have shown a track record of successfully integrating from homelessness back into homeful society, at least in 26 other similar Pine Street Inn housing locations. On-site supervisors are part of the plan as well.

When the Pine Street Inn formally announced its intention to purchase the property, neighbors on Upton Street (hereinafter, "Uppity Street") wouldn't hear of it. After a series of meetings with the Union Park Neighborhood Association, which includes Uppity Street, Pine Street Inn agreed to cut down the number of residents from 45 to 37 and finally to 30. This despite the fact that Hope House, the current occupant, houses 60 people in recovery from alcohol and substance abuse. Of note is the fact that those 60 or so Hope House residents are transient in nature, whereas the Pine Street residents are looking to put down roots in the community.

Additionally, Hope House has been on Uppity Street for more than 25 years. Presumably, the Upton Street residents so outraged by the Pine Street Inn have not. As one astute South Ender pointed out in a letter to the editor of the South End News, purchase prices on Uppity Street properties in the last 25 years have assuredly reflected the presence of a single room occupancy building complex in a discount to the buyer. That's why Uppity Street properties generally don't cost as much as Union Park properties (well, that and the fact that one-half the street overlooks a particularly unattractive back of the West Dedham Street post office, there's no garden and/or fountain in the middle, etc.).

One would think that the Uppity Street residents would be thrilled at the prospect of having one-half the number of occupants living in the subject property, complete with supervisors and a population that wasn't nearly as transient as the present population, not to mention the fact that drug or alcohol abuse would result in not being accepted into the program.

However, according to last week's South End News, the president of the Union Park Neighborhood Association stated that the Uppity Street neighbors have a "preference for ownership....When you have ownership, the people who own those apartments care about crime and they care about trash and they care about the schools. When you have a neighborhood filled with renters,...the neighborhoods tend to deteriorate fairly quickly."

Translation: When you have people who look like you and act like you and earn like you and spend like you, its much better. As one high-up Uppity Street resident was quoted in a Boston Globe article several months ago, "unlike you and me, its difficult to tell who these people are."

I'd like to know where these owners are who care so much about trash and schools. Certainly not in the pages of the South End News where one South End yuppie, a couple months ago, explained that she sends her darling daughter to kindergarten outside the city as there are "no good schools in the South End." What about the trash scattered all over Waltham Street on every trash pick up day? I doubt its all just renters who lazily toss their trash outside of proper trash tossing hours.

And what about the lazy empty-nester couple in my building who couldn't be bothered to put their trash in the proper place and repeatedly just threw it down, untied and unsecured on the floor in the trash room? Owners!!

The noisy trust fund brat beneath me (see entry entitled "I own here") who thought nothing of blaring her stereo speakers out in the courtyard at 3am on a weeknight? Sorry, not a renter.

The other trust fund babes who lived across the hall and thought it was funny to play fetch with their dog up and down the hall also at 3am on a weeknights? You guessed it, owners (well, at least their parents were owners).

The creepy older guy in my friend's luxury condo building who always reeks of alcohol and has troublingly young prostitutes coming in and out at all hours? Owner!! Bet he really cares about crime, trash and schools.

The dog owners who think nothing of letting their dogs pee in the doorway of my friend's store time and time again, despite having been asked not to? Owners, not renters!!

The person who threw a beer bottle out of his luxury loft window which landed on the head of an innocent passer-by? Owner!!

Although generally speaking, I agree with the sentiment that owners care more about their neighborhoods than do renters (take a walk around Commonwealth Ave. in Brighton/Allston sometime). However, that generalization fails to apply in the South End of recent years. Which has become, in effect, Brighton/Allston East. To put it another way, you get pretty much the same element, only in nicer cars and in nicer condos, which are paid for primarily by mommy and daddy. And in Brighton/Allston, there aren't as many heirloom tomatoes or over hyped and overpriced restaurants. Also, in Brighton/Allston, you can still buy toilet paper - the regular kind. I think you might still be able to find toilet paper in the South End, but only of the hand-woven, organic, fair-trade, hand-painted-to-match-my-guest-bathroom variety.

But getting back to the Uppity street issue, as I've stated before, I only wish that I had been given the opportunity to pick and choose my South End neighbors as the Uppity Street Ass-sociation thinks it has the right to do. If you live in a city, you do not get to choose your neighbors, especially when your neighbor had previously been a home to 60 former alcohol and substance abusers in recovery, thereby removing the surprise element from the argument (What? That charming townhouse next door with the elderly couple is being turned into a house for recovering substance abusers?!??).

I wish there had been a community meeting to discuss whether or not it was appropriate to allow my neighboring (but apparently high functioning) alcoholic, binge-drinking, late-night partying frat boys and sorority sisters and creepy old pimps to purchase their luxury condos near mine. And I wish that my building and ones like it had the availability of an on-site supervisor to help my high-income neighbors with their addiction problems. I also wish that there had been a community meeting to discuss the propriety of the disgusting and offensive anti-Pine Street Inn posters that popped up in windows all over Uppity Street this summer.

Those options are not available, however, in a city. I think that the Uppity Street folk so up in arms about the prospect of, well let's just say it, poor people moving in next door belong in a suburban gated community. Their suburban mentality, whereby they believe in a homogeneous, white-washed and polar-fleeced neighborhood population, does nothing to add value to the South End. In my opinion, it has made the "neighborhood deteriorate fairly quickly," to put it into their own words. Apparently, if you have no maple and granite counter tops (the mark of the nouveau South Ender), cannot drop $100 on two pieces of sushi or a meal involving pan-seared pea shoots, heirloom tomatoes and whatever else was trendy in most other cities about 5 years ago, and can't bring South End real estate prices into every conversation, then you are not welcome here.

I've always been somewhat fascinated by the oval garden in the middle of Union Park and how the residents of that street have taken such pride in maintaining such a beautiful, yet exclusive (to them) public urban space. Perhaps the Upton Street residents could make an appeal to move the iron fence over one block so that they could gate themselves in, far from the poor people and minorities who are so different from themselves.

Mini Posting....

2008-08-17T08:00:00.001-07:00

Last week, there was a stabbing at "uber-hip" Stella on Washington Street. Restaurant-goers, including many residents of Chestnut Hill, witnessed a patron stab another patron with a butter knife. No joke. The funny thing is that every person to whom I mentioned this news item responded the same: You mean outside, in that park? Or, You mean across the street? Why was I the only one not surprised to hear that the perp was a patron and that the stabbing took place within or near the confines of the restaurant? Classy people, classy place!!

It's All Marc Jacobs' Fault....

2008-08-17T07:40:00.000-07:00

According to this week’s Boston Globe, Provincetown is “no longer mainly for gays.” Nowadays, P-Town is “courting a broader population.” And from the looks of things, that population is wearing a lot of pleated Dockers. And I don’t mean the Lesbians!

Now, I know this blog generally deals with the yuppification of Boston’s South End, however, it seems that Provincetown is going through the same changes that the South End has already had to endure and I think its interesting to compare and contrast the two. What got me pondering was a quote from a young dad visiting P-Town, stroller and infant in tow. He said, “I remember coming here and it was all about alternative lifestyles. Now its calmer….the restaurants are very kid welcoming.” How South End of him.

Provincetown was a summer vacation destination for my family back from the mid 1960’s through the mid 1970’s. Don’t laugh, but we stayed at the Boatslip and I didn’t have two daddies (then). This was before there were tea-dances and DJ Mary Alice and flag-twirlers and D&G sunglasses and cosmopolitans (Blogger’s Note: That’s me, above, jumping into the Boatslip Pool, circa sometime in the mid-70’s [My flags and my cosmopolitan have been cropped out of the photo to save space]. Look how much fabric they used on bathing suits back then!! Also, the water in the pool had a much thinner consistency as hair product had not yet been invented).

My parents dragged me to P-Town not because it was “child-friendly” but because it was an artist’s colony and they thought it was intellectually stimulating. They were artists and they enjoyed being around other like-minded people. To them, the diversity and creative atmosphere in Provincetown was more important than whether there were changing tables, children’s menus and sippee cups. If the reverse were true, we would have stayed in Hyannis or Falmouth. As far as I was concerned, I was happy to swim in the Boatslip pool all day and go hunting for snails (that’s escargot to my South End audience) on the wooden posts under the deck of the Boatslip, bringing them back to our room, much to the horror of my mother. Apparently, people still hunt for snails there, too, late at night.

I get the feeling, however, that the young parents visiting Provincetown, who are being “actively courted” by the P-Town tourism boards, are into the diversity of the creative community not so much. I don’t really see any of them at the P-Town Film Festival or at any of the few remaining galleries. They’re more about trolley tours, whale-watching, ice cream and shopping. Which is fine. But, just like in the South End, there needs to be a little realization and respect for the community that was there before them.

One long-time P-Town vacationer quoted in the Globe article said that it “used to be that you could walk down the street holding hands with a man and you felt safe. Now you feel gawked at.” He hit the nail on the head with that statement. Regular readers of this blog might recall that I had experienced something similar a couple of years ago in the South End, when a bunch of my gay male friends kissed each other goodbye, quite innocently, on the corner of Waltham Street and Tremont, right in front of the Butcher Shop. Patrons of that mega-yuppified establishment looked on in horror and possibly even disgust, which made me want to hurl rotten heirloom tomatoes at them (See post entitled The Long Kiss Goodnight).

And just several weeks ago, when my party of 8 gay men was called by the hostess at Rocca, I turned to notice a Lindsay Lohan/Paris Hilton wannabe at the bar with her greasy-looking boyfriend pointing and laughing at us. I’m a pretty good lip-reader, and I am fairly certain I saw her say the word “fags” as they stared. I, too, feel “gawked at,” both in P-Town and in the South End.

As I am always careful to point out, there are plenty of straight people in P-Town and the South End who do not fall into this category. I have numerous straight friends who live in the South End or vacation in P-Town who have gay friends in their immediate social circles, attend gay weddings, and for whom one’s sexuality is not an issue in the least. They don’t gawk and make us feel as if we were on display at the zoo (“Please do not feed the muscleboys”). They don’t sit on a trolley and look shocked when they see two men holding hands.

All of this leads me to the following questions: Why does Provincetown (or to a certain extent, the South End) need to be “child-friendly”? When did “child-friendly” and “kid-welcoming” become the paradigm to which we should all aspire? Shouldn’t we still keep a few “adult-friendly” venues, if just for nostalgia’s sake? Are we gentrifying these places into blandness?

The United States is about 3200 miles long, from the easternmost part of Cape Cod to the western shores of Oregon, much of it child-friendly. Can’t we just claim one or two miles at the eastern end of it all for ourselves? P-Town should be all about shell shops, fudge stores, restaurants with never-changing “specials” and short-shorts for “boys.” Not a Marc Jacobs store. That stuff should stay on Newbury Street where it belongs. It introduces an unnecessary element to a seaside town (and believe me, I have no problem with high-end designer boutiques whatsoever, in the right context). The way things are going, I’m sure that a Baby Gap will make its way onto both Commercial Street and Tremont Street within the next 5 years.

In the meantime, if this yuppification/gentrification continues, we’re going to see some changes in Provincetown: A-House will become A-B-C House Day Care Center. Body Body? How ‘bout Baby Baby. Then there’s All American Toddler. Don’t forget Clean White Girl. The Pied Pacifier. And Toys of Eros will, of course, switch fro dildos to Dockers.

If children happen to come along to P-Town, then that’s fine, but I’d argue that they don’t need any special provisions or accommodations. I was there as a child and there were very few amenities for those with children back then, but the parents who brought children there did just fine left to their own devices. And no one imploded when they saw two men holding hands (which I remember seeing a lot of , and I turned out just…..well…, y’know).

Don’t get me wrong – unlike dogs, I love kids (it’s the parents I could live without). There are just certain areas in which kids should romp freely and have the rule of the manor. If I were to go (hypothetically speaking!!) to McDonald’s, or Chuckie Cheese, I expect to see and hear sticky children. When I am dining in the newest South End hotspot at 10 o’clock on a Friday night, I should be seeing adults from Chestnut Hill and other bridge and tunnel flotsam and jetsam, not 6-year-olds who should be in bed. This, no matter how many layers of Prada in which their ultra-cool hipster parents are draped. I think its cruel to keep children up that late in that type of environment, and I do not blame them for crying or whining in the least (these are the same parents who argue that they must have nannies and an SUV to transport their only child, when, believe it or not, I know of some parents who with two small children make due with a two-door coupe and no help). Sometimes when you have kids you have to make – gulp – sacrifices for their well-being and you might even – gasp – have to stay in on a Friday night!!

If children are being wheeled down Commercial Street in P-Town, then they are going to get an eyeful and perhaps an education. Our lives should not have to be put on a back burner, or worse, sanitized, because some whiny and entitled parents brought little Madison to Provincetown or the South End and she saw two men kissing. Life ain’t Burger King and you don’t get to have everything your way. There are enough places in this world where the rights and entitlements of new parents are paramount. Let’s just have one or two places where they aren’t.

All The Way To The Bank....

2008-07-15T03:21:00.000-07:00

"It's more than just a bone or collar, . .The master really cares."

I have no idea what that quote from the owner of the South End's newest "high-end" doggie boutique and spa means, but I am certain that such a phrase had a very different connotation in the South End of the 80's and 90's.

Espeso, described in the Boston Globe as a full-service destination for retail therapy (plus a grooming spa) for dogs, is located on Washington Street in the South End (where else?) across from the Peter's Park/Joe Wex dog recreation center. Espeso offers Ralph Lauren-inspired dog pillows ("chocolate bones" is a personal favorite of the Globe writer)(insert lame comment about mid-90's South End sexual preferences here). Also available are Swarovski crystal-studded collars (presumably for evening), all-natural dog treats (wheat and corn-free for those pooches with digestive difficulties). Finally, there's a spa area, offering such necessities as "calming aromatherapy spritzers." Which I needed for myself at about this point in the article.

As readers of this blog might already be aware, I am a huge proponent of supporting local businesses. Moreover, I know people who know two out of the three owners of Espeso and I have heard the nicest things about them. As they are genuinely nice people who have taken a risk in starting a local business, I want them to do well and I wish them the greatest success in their venture. Its just the nature of the products and the services they offer that I can't seem to wrap my head around.

Perhaps its because I am not a dog-lover. In fact, I'm not even a dog-liker. I would never have come out as "anti-dog" until I read another Globe article this week, entitled "I hate your dog," by the always dapper Wesley Morris. In his controversial article, Morris berates the current vogue dog "yuppification" whereby dogs are treated better than children, with "doggie spa days, mani-pedi's, pashminas, feathered french daybeds, tiaras and gourmet ice cream." Doggie massage and doggie yoga are also becoming popular amongst the yuppie crowd.

I guess when you have that much disposable income, you feel the need to dispose of it any way you can. And as long as there's a market for it, you might as well take advantage of the situation and profit from the penchant for over-indulgence displayed by some South End yuppies. In fact, I wish I had the foresight to have opened the first South End dog bakery or dog boutique/dog spa. Of course that would force me to mingle with a crowd that I have pretty much managed to avoid for the last decade and a half - the South End Dog Owner. That breed is not only known for its tendency to purchase ridiculous (and laughably-priced) dog services and accoutrements, but also by its ability to break into other people's important sidewalk conversations to make insipid comments and ask annoying questions about dog breeds/behavior/bathroom habits.

I cannot tell you how many important conversations I've had with normal dog owners on Tremont Street that have been interrupted by freakshow dog owners just at the point in the conversation where I am about to find out who slept with whom, how much someone paid for her new condo, what kind of granite they chose for their kitchen, what shade of taupe Dennis Duffy is using in their living room, or which realtor jumped ship and now works for (or no longer works for) the Hammond-Gibson-Keller-Sotheby's-Domain-Domain-Domain empire.

By way of example:

Normal Dog Owner: Anyways, she walks into her kitchen and there's the realtor doing it on her brand-new granite countertops with a client after the open house!

Me: Really? Who was the realtor? What office are they in? What kind of granite? Was it Smokey Taupe, Plymouth Rock or Gargoyle?

Normal Dog Owner: You're not going to believe this, but it was...

Freakshow Dog Owner: Oh my god!! That dog is SO cute!! What is it? My friend had a labradoodle/pit bull/greyhound/terrier mix and it looked just like this! What's his name? Ohhhh, cute dog. Can I pet it? That's a good boy. What does he like to eat? My dog gets diarrhea when he eats celery. Where'd you get his collar? I know I know you from the dog park. I'm Snowball's mommy....

Me: Step off, freak!! We're talkin' here!!

By the time the freakshow dogowner leaves, we have both forgotten what we were saying, and the conversation resumes like this:

Normal Dog Owner: Ok, what were we saying?*

Me: I have no idea. I like your shoes.

In any event, I'm a bit put off not only by this entitled behavior, but also by the whole dog bakery-spa-treatment thing. I find it hard to believe that South Enders can spend money on Swarovski crystal dog chews or whatever and that over $300,000 was donated for a dog park (ok, a dog recreational space) in the South End when other South Enders are having trouble putting food on their tables, buying clothes for their kids, or putting gas in their cars. Believe it or not, there are some South Enders for whom these issues take precedence over dog massages, yoga and imported pheasant dog treats. In fact, many of these people cannot even afford people massages, let alone doggie ones. And we wonder as the entries in the Police Beat section of the South End News grow longer and the chasm between the haves and the have-nots grows wider.

* In case you were wondering, the answers are: Someone who used to be at Gibson, highly polished midnight black (not good for fingerprints, incidentally), and Gargoyle.

Step Away From Restaurant Row!!

2008-04-27T05:40:00.000-07:00

Restaurant Row has been on my mind a lot lately. It used to be located on Tremont Street. Then, for a while, it moved to Washington Street. Now, it probably means Harrison Avenue. I'm sure that in a few years it will have moved to Albany Street, and then maybe the Southeast Expressway, and then under water.

Seeing South End favorite Garden of Eden dark and empty at dinner time started me thinking about this topic. For the first couple of years, GOE (as we used to call it, affectionately, back in the day) was a fantastic place to get an inexpensive bite to eat. One could grab dinner (in my case, a GOE salad topped with a grilled chicken breast, and a half order of pasta) for under $15.00, including service, not including alcohol. Included, weather permitting, was perhaps the best people watching in all of Boston. It seemed like everybody walking by knew everybody dining, and vice versa. In those first couple of years, I logged in a lot of GOE time, with friends, with past relationships, and every Wednesday night, a "date" with one of my dearest friends. I'm quite sure that I ate there at least 4 times a week.

Sadly, I stopped eating at GOE when prices skyrocketed and it started looking like a Chuck E. Cheese (by day) and a geriatric center (by night) , circa 2003. Walking by the darkened windows at night now, I see the ghosts of past friendships laughing at that tilted and warped community table in the front, before it became a baby changing facility for local mommy groups at lunchtime.

With GOE in mind, I started thinking about how, unsurprisingly, the South End has lost so many affordable restaurants over the past few years. And by affordable, I mean affordable in the sense of normal citizenry being able to eat someplace 3 or 4 times in a week. Not in the sense of "The dining halls at BU are gross, so I hop in the Jag with my friends and head over to the South End every night on my parents' credit card."

An article last month in the South End News addressed the issue of affordable dining option in the South End. In the article, a couple of general managers of South End "hotspots" weighed in on the topic, stating that there are now "so many more affordable options," that successful restaurants in the area "keep their price points within human reach," and that "people want to dine out every night, not just a few nights." What? Where? The restaurants cited by these GM's charge in the low-to-mid $30 range for an appetizer and an entree. That's exclusive of service, alcohol, dessert, side dishes, etc. Add alcohol and service, and you're in the well over $50 per person. Do that every night and you've spent at least $350 in a week's time. Is that what passes for "affordable dining" these days?

Apparently, all that granite, maple and stainless steel is sitting there in the South End unused!! Why use your six-burner Viking stove when you could dine out for a fraction of the cost of, say, having a personal chef?

We seem to have lost all the affordable options while the yuppie options have increased 10 or 20 fold. Gone are Geoffrey's (I know, it moved around a bit, but its not here anymore), Rave (not for everyone, but it had some good dishes), On the Park, Purple Cactus on Shawmut (eye candy central back in its day), and Flux, just to name a few. Interestingly, all of the above had some connection to the gay community, through either ownership or explicitly catering to the gay community. Not surprisingly, they did not survive the recent "straightening" of the South End ("The Great Straightening of 'o1").

In their places popped up a bunch of yuppie "Emperor's New Clothes" restaurants. At one point, I was fairly certain that several of the new yupporiums could have switched their menus with each other and no one would have noticed. It was as if some consortium of South End chefs had found a New York Magazine from 1994, circled all the buzzwords from the restaurant review section, and vowed to include them all on their menus. Mmmm. Pea tendrils!! Heirloom tomatoes!

In that vein, I am including here the menu from a fictitious, pretentious restaurant ("Chez Louise") that could easily be located in the South of End if it were real. Truth be told, it is a yuppie menu generator of sorts, with all the current dining buzzwords - and wines. I have spent quite literally hours hitting the refresh button to come up with even more hilarious dishes. Twice-baked hand-picked brioche with a durian compote? You bet. Maple-glazed ramps with a dead-sea-salt sorbet? Mmm-mmm-mmm. South End restaurateurs, you've been found out. We know what you've been up to and where you came up with those menus.

Check it out - you'll be glad you did: http://thegamespoilers.com/menu

In the late 1990's, the award-winning food writer Alan Richman authored a scathing and controversial article about Boston restaurants in GQ Magazine. Among the barbs aimed at Boston chefs were comments about Boston not being the capital of haute cuisine, but rather "heap cuisine," whereby incongruous and non-sensical ingredients were heaped upon diners' plates, and portion size was more important than quality or finesse. I seem to remember that he (or was it another critic?) was also of the opinion that Bostonians generally were more interested in the drinks than food. Visiting the current South End hotspots, I'm not exactly sure we've come a long way since that article. Aside from nearly interchangeable menu's, I've been to all the hotspots and although they weren't necessarily bad, they weren't anything memorable. In fact, the best dining experiences I've had in the last several years have been in Somerville, Brookline, Cambridge and Jamaica Plain.

One new-ish Harrison Avenue eatery left me stunned when patrons there (some in acid washed denim jackets, I swear) at two very large and separate tables had dueling "Happy Birthday" songfests. As if that hadn't been enough of an assault on my senses, the bar area, on this Sunday night was filled with what I can only imagine was some sort of gathering of many young Asian women for rent and many older men looking to rent them. The food did not justify the horrific visuals.

At another Washington Street hotspot, heatseeking and fur-clad 60-something friends of my parents from Chestnut Hill cornered me, raving about the food, and their daughter who just got engaged to a surgeon. Having been dragged there by friends and acquaintances numerous times (not on my vote), I have never understood the fuss. The food was ok, kind of dull actually, and certainly nothing special. The drinks were good (of course), and it was quite a good place to see and be seen, which is really what its all about in the S.E. I don't think there was one neck that wasn't craned to scan the room, not one couple making eye contact with each other, an attention-deficit-disorder nightmare. If I could have read the thought balloons over each diner's head, they would have read: See me!! Notice me!! I'm here in this hotspot!! I've arrived!! Now I'm fabulous, too!!

I found the people-watching in the park just across the way to be much more interesting. I also made a mental note that if I ever wanted to go looting, Chestnut Hill apparently sits empty on a Saturday night.

Of course there are still some affordable places left that are quite good, but I'm not going to mention them for fear they'll be overrun and I won't be able to eat there anymore. Hint: None of them has valet parking! And not one of them looks like a Disney-fied version of a Parisian bistro or brasserie.

Truth be told, I want in on the action, so that I too can laugh all the way to the bank. I am currently looking for investors for my new french style bistro-brasserie tentatively called "L'Arriviste." The menu will be an Icelandic-inspired, French-Alsatian-Carribean-Asian Fusion noodle bar, with an extensive cocktail and bottled water list. The kitchen will be run by two Columbian sisters who can sometimes be quite argumentative and who happen to be conjoined at the hip. Each one creates a dish with ingredients they think the other one would have used with items stolen from the other sister's fridge. Both were named as "chefs to watch" in the 2007 year-end issue of Chefwatch: the magazine about Columbian conjoined sibling chefs.

There will be one communal table, situated in an old bank vault, but it will feel like wartime France. Reservations will only be accepted in French, and reservations will be required even for seats at the bar, which is actually a salvaged farmhouse sheep urinal, shipped over from a working organic farm in Reykjavic which has been in operation since 1371. Videos of the urinal's restoration and rebuilding will be shown on screens over the bar. Reservations will also be necessary for the restrooms. All food will be organically grown and from farms no further than five miles from the South End. Menus will be printed on organic heirloom tomato pulp with cruelty-free, organic squid ink. One percent of the profit from all amuse-bouches will go to an outreach and education program to stop local valet parking employees from smoking.

Children will, of course, be welcome and no diner shall be more than 3 seats away from a baby-changing station. Valet parking for strollers will be available and valet parking for automobiles will be mandatory. There will be a dog-walking service and free shuttle service to Atelier 450, Atelier 490, Atelier 560 and any other South End condominiums with a vaguely artistic or bohemian name. A 9-square-foot retail "space" next door will sell the chefs' favorite organic tap waters from around the world at extraordinarily-inflated prices, as well as hand-signed original discarded menus from the restaurant.

Anyone want to invest?

"You Can't Spit Without Hitting a Bugaboo?" Try Me....

2008-03-16T13:16:00.000-07:00

An article on the front page of Saturday's Boston Globe by Sarah Schweitzer about the recent South End baby boom elicited several e-mails from friends as well as a feeling of nausea that still persists. According to the article, the "happening" South End is now experiencing an increase in new mommies and their offspring - well, let's just say rich white yuppie mommies carrying $320 Petunia Pickle Bottom diaper bags (no relation to a "Petunia Pickle Bottom" who might have frequented the South End circa 1994).

Even worse: Garden of Eden has cordoned off a section for stroller parking and the Globe included a photo of four yuppie moms and their adorable babies sitting at the very same G.O.E. table at which I frequently dined with my closest friends and experienced some very romantic dates several years ago. (Note the absence of any minorities in any of the 12 Globe photos. Perhaps the "mommy and me" cafe groups don't actively seek out or even know any minorities, or, shockingly, perhaps the minority mommies in the South End actually have to work for a living and can't sit in a cafe all day nursing their babies and macchiato's). One mommy quoted in the article says that there are "so many people here now with children that just because you have a baby does not mean you have to move out of the South End." That's right - you can now freely put your creature comfort yuppie needs before the needs of your child.

And when its time for these kids to start school, I'd bet that none of them will enroll in a South End public school.

Another yummy mummy explained that now, "you can leave Cheerios under the table and the waitstaff never seems to mind." The hell they don't! An informal poll of a few friends who are servers in some South End restaurant/yupporiums has revealed that NONE of them agreed with that statement. Not long ago, I had the displeasure if sitting next to a table of about 3 toddlers at a normal adult dinner time at Picco. By the time the meal was finished, the table looked as if a some combination of fingerpainting class and drive-by shooting had taken place.

Baby food, tomato sauce, apple and other juices, Cheerio's, and god knows what were smeared all over the table and on the floor below. Not only had three adults taken over a table for six while at least a dozen people waited on a busy weeknight, but when they left, three servers had to spend a considerable amount of time wiping down the table and floor to get it presentable for the next party. None of them looked pleased; in fact all three of them looked disgusted. Of course the yuppies left the table without making any effort to clean any part of the mess they made, two of them even laughed about the situation as they walked away. The entire rhythm of the restaurant was disrupted as the entire waitstaff was forced to ignore the diners and clean the mess. The entitled parents were oblivious to the extra work they created for the serving class and also to the desires of the other patrons to dine in a peaceful manner. (Kudos to Flour Bakery and Cafe for not allowing strollers as they take up most of the customer space in the smallish customer area).

Making matters worse was my biggest yuppie mommy pet peeve: putting a diapered baby on a restaurant table. I should add here that I unequivocally love babies and children. Anyone who knows me well knows that I will make a beeline for any baby and that holding a baby is one of my favorite things to do in life. I do not, however, love entitled parents. And there is something about placing a diapered baby directly onto a table or a Starbuck's counter that makes me want to strangle the clueless parent.

Also not long ago, on a Saturday night, I was dining at a very special pea-shoots-and-heirloom-truffle-oil Washington Street restaurant with friends. We heard some whining coming from the drowsy-eyed children at the next table, whom I would assume to be about 4 or 5 years old. The kids weren't screaming, and they probably could not be heard beyond our table. When I looked at my watch, I realized that it was about 5 minutes shy of 11 pm and that the parents, oblivious to their children's needs, were not even on their main courses yet. No wonder the kids were whiny and cranky. They needed to be sleeping at that hour. But the heat-seeking parents, in their trendy clothing (yes, the mom was wearing Uggs) obviously felt that their need to spend a Saturday evening out trendsetting outweighed the welfare of their children. Maybe they couldn't find a babysitter. "Why should we have to stay in?" I could hear them say. "We deserve to go out on a Saturday night!" I was tempted to call DSS but I refrained. Your kids deserve to sleep like normal children.

But I digress. My favorite part of the article was where a yuppie South End mom complained about a parking ticket she received one day when she left her one-year-old strapped into the car while she double-parked and ran her groceries into the house one winter's day. Upon receiving a $45 parking ticket, she exclaimed "that's not family-friendly."

You know what's not "family-friendly?" Leaving a one-year-old in a car alone in the South End. In fact, I think it is cause for DSS involvement. For how long was that mom dropping off her groceries if a meter maid, who presumably was not there when the mom pulled up, had the time to find the car double parked and write a ticket?

In the interest of full disclosure, I have over-protective tendencies stemming from my own childhood. Typically, as a child, I wore a snowsuit through July and was not allowed to swim within 24 hours of having eaten anything. Personally, I would be too afraid to leave a child unattended in a double-parked car in the South End for fear of, say, crime or a traffic accident or myriad other unfortunate possibilities. I think a reasonable parent would have brought the baby in first, put the baby in a crib, and then brought in the groceries. But that's just me. Of course I also do not feel entitled enough to double-park in violation of traffic codes and possibly endanger the lives of others should there be an emergency and then complain about the ticket I received because the entire world does not revolve around me.

Also, some of the mommies or yuppies or whatever in the article complained that in the "winter, when the parks and outdoor cafes are not an option, . . there are few large spaces where parents can gather and small urban homes can make large playgroup gatherings difficult." Imagine - all that granite, maple and stainless steel isn't child-friendly? Your pseudo-artist's loft doesn't provide enough child-friendly space? Maybe, just maybe your needs don't coincide with the best needs of your children.

I have a friend who has three young children and lives in a nearby suburb of Boston. Horrified, she e-mailed me the Globe article and explained that she could have lived in a $2 million South End condo. But when she had children, her priorities changed. She and her husband actually decided to put the well being of their children before their own needs. "I didn't want my kids playing in dog shit," she told me. "I wanted them to live in a place that was appropriate for children. It wasn't the South End. I don't feel like I'm missing anything by not being there and my kids can actually play safely both indoors and out." Presumably, her need to dine at the latest trendy hotspot or purchase heirloom tomatoes was outweighed by the interests of her children. What a concept. Too bad the yuppies profiled in the Boston Globe haven't figured it out. I wonder how many of them contributed oodles of money to the new dog park, where dogs have plenty of space to roam freely? Introducing the South End: Where people apparently care more about their dogs than their kids.

I'm Still Here....

2008-03-16T12:17:00.000-07:00

Rumors of my demise (at least from the South End) that surfaced in last week's letters to the editor column of the South End News are untrue. One of the Uppity Street yups who is vehemently against the proposed Pine Street Inn Transitional Housing on Upton Street and was quoted in the Globe's big story a few weeks ago as saying, inter alia, that "unlike you and me, its difficult to tell who these people are" thinks that this Blog is divisive (to which I vehemently agree).

He also apparently felt the need to spread a rumor that I no longer reside in the South End - according to him, I am two (2) men who live in Dorchester. Adding insult to what he must have thought was injury, "we" moved there due to escalating real estate costs in the South End.

Let me get this matter straight, no chaser: I am one man who resides in the South End. This despite the rising cost of real estate. And if people think that I am two men, well than I had better get myself to the gym a bit more often.

I have, however, been spending alot of time away from the South End as it kind of repulses me nowadays. I have learned to ignore the emperor's new clothes-type restaurants here and I've realized that the suburbs of Boston offer alot more interesting and less pretentious options - for dining and most everything else (although besides dining, the South End really offers little else of interest, but for the BCA and two remaining non-pretentious stores: the Motley ones and Aunt Sadie's). Also, practically no one I know lives here anymore.

And if insinuating that I had "moved to Dorchester" was somehow meant as an insult, at this point, I prefer Dot to the S.E. It still has interesting people, diversity, and quite a few non-pretentious restaurants. You can't even buy heirloom tomatoes there (yet)....

Be Ashamed....

2008-01-20T06:56:00.000-08:00

An interesting article on the homeless and local gentrification by David Abel appeared in today's Boston Globe. As usual, some Nouvelle South End residents expressed their displeasure at having to come into contact (well, only visual contact) with, gasp, homeless people!! Can you imagine?! People who have had their parents pay good money so that they could live in a homogenized, white-bread, Pottery Barn inspired community are having to look at filthy homeless people - where they live, where they eat, even where they buy their heirloom tomatoes!! Of course, the Pine Street Inn (a homeless shelter located off of Harrison Avenue in the South End) is to blame for the hordes of homeless causing mayhem in our visual landscape. Check out the article here:

http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2008/01/20/as_gentrification_spreads_rich_poor_seek_a_balance/

In recent months, a rumor has been spreading through the city that the Pine Street Inn "is on the cusp of closing." As a result, Lyndia Downie, the president of the Pine Street Inn, has been forced to debunk this rumor, adding that it has been persistently spread by people selling real estate in the area.

It is no secret that I find most (not all, but most) South End realtors repugnant and dishonest. This, however, really takes the prize. Let's just whitewash the South End and make it look like Wellesley. I can hear them saying: Yes, it gets plenty of light and its right near the dog park. Don't worry about the homeless people out there, they'll all be gone when the Pine Street Inn closes down in a few months. I know, they really are a pain to look at, but they'll be gone soon!

The article continues to quote some local business (and in this part of town that generally means "restaurant" or "nail salon") owners who have taken certain measures, like raising prices, to keep the homeless away. And by "away", I don't necessarily mean away from the inside of their businesses, but rather away from the visual field of their yuppie customers. One restaurant owner profiled is quite satisfied with the fact that he's been able to reduce the number of homeless customers.

Apparently, its all about reducing the number of homeless customers, not reducing the number of homeless people. That would certainly be more of a challenge (and a whole lot more beneficial to society as a whole). I guess people in the South End have their priorities.

Another one of the article's subjects describes how she has heard the patrons of her yoga studio exclaim, "I don't want to go out to my car late at night. I don't want to go there," in reference to the throngs of homeless clogging the streets much like the zombies in the recent film "I am Legend."

My response? You don't GET to go there!! As I have mentioned on this blog before, like a mantra, get over yourselves! You live in a CITY, not a suburb! You don't get to choose your neighbors and keep in mind: they were there a long, long time before you and your yoga mat showed up. If you choose to live in a city, there is a trade-off. You GET to walk out your front door in the morning and walk to pick up your soy latte within 50 steps of your condo. You GET to buy your heirloom tomatoes without leaving the garage in your Chevy Suburban. You GET to go shopping at the finest shops and boutiques without having to sit in your Suburban stuck in mall traffic. You GET to go to restaurants that drizzle truffle oil on your pea tendrils without having to valet park the car (and, this being Boston, without having to step into a time machine set to 1991). You GET to meet for Sunday brunch without having to pass an Olive Garden on your way there. If you want to be able to walk to your car safely after your evening yoga class, you need to live in Wellesley or Needham. Cities, for the most part, have homeless people and crime. Upscale suburbs, for the most part, do not. If you go out at night to your car in the city, you need to be alert and aware of the fact that there will be homeless people. Its just a fact of life and it has been that way for a very long time. And this despite your yoga mat, heirloom tomatoes, nannies and Burberry scarf. You know you deserve better (the brochure for your condo even says "you've earned it!"), but that's just the way life goes.

Further into the article, a nouvelle South Ender (an accountant) whose nanny has been propositioned for SEX (I kid you not), bemoans his having to see homeless people every day in the vicinity of his Fay Street condo. "It does sort of grate on you," he adds. Clearly another victim of USS ("Upton Street Syndrome,") a condition affecting certain South Enders who feel that, despite the fact that they have moved onto a street with lower than typical condo prices, they can assert the same privileges as those living in the penthouse unit at the Ritz. (See previous posting entitled "Uppity Street," wherein Upton Street residents complained of a home for homeless in transition moving onto their street). It is well-known in the annals (that's two "n's," I'll do the jokes around here) of South End real estate that The Fay Street development was priced considerably lower than the other phases of that condo development. I guess "beggars can't be choosers," at least when it comes to whining about homeless people.

What grates on me is that such a suburban mindset has creeped into the South End in recent years. In the suburbs, you can create gated communities where you can associate and live with cookie-cutter people only, just like yourself. In the South End, it appears that there is a movement to get rid of (and certainly disparage) anyone not quite like the other luxury-condo inhabitants that have recently arrived. Its bad enough if your neighbor doesn't have a maple, granite and stainless steel kitchen. How offensive it must be when your neighbor has no kitchen at all....

Quick Posting....

2007-12-07T05:20:00.001-08:00

Ok, technically this link for a new residential "lought" development has nothing to do with the South End, but it could happen here if we're not careful. Check out:

http://rivierarealestateagency.com/images/plastinumb2a.swf

And do not skip the intro. This is every South End realtor's wet dream. Imagine: a relaxing oasis where like minded people can mingle without judgment.

Also: Restrained elegance combined with luxury that knows no restraint.

If you were somehow to take away the references to New York and add something about artists living or having lived there once, it could very well be in the South End.

Something like "Palette Knife 580: Velvet rope living in a faux-bohemian artists enclave, your "lought" can be customized by one of our top designers to reflect your status. . . . steps away from restaurant row. . . . granite, maple and stainless steel."

And because this is Boston, I should explain that the website is a complete hoax, developed by a bunch of creative advertising types in NY (damn - should have saved it for my April Fool's posting).

Go ahead, you've earned it!! (Perhaps my least favorite phrase in the English Language. Seldom has anyone at whom that phrase is directed actually earned anything of note).

Just A Clarification....

2007-11-28T09:14:00.000-08:00

If you are reading this blog, chances are you stumbled across it while reading the article entitled "The South End Is So Over" in November's Boston Magazine. Not surprisingly, when I first learned that Boston Magazine was going to use this blog as a springboard for an article about the yuppie invasion of the South End, I was thrilled. The author did a fantastic job of summarizing the feelings of a certain population of the neighborhood: those of us who have had enough with entitled yuppies, luxury condo's, emperor's-new-clothes restaurants and pretentious boutiques taking over what had previously been an interesting, affordable and diverse part of the city of Boston.

I was saddened (but not the least bit surprised) to read some of the comments both here in this blog and on the Boston Magazine website. In an effort to bring some humor and creative style to the article, the author used images such as "twin sets and pearls" and "skinny jeans" to bring his prose to life. Many of the comments dissected the authors use of these creative vehicles ad nauseum. Let's get something straight: We all know that not all twin-set-and-pearls-wearers are bad people and not all skinny jeans wearers are good. (Blogger's note: It is true that all Uggs wearers are bad people). That wasn't the point of the article, however. The point was that a new wave of really obnoxious entitled yuppies have moved in, making the neighborhood a less interesting and more unpleasant (albeit a supposedly safer) place to live.

Another string of comments suggested that people who moved in a couple of years prior to the yuppie invasion have no standing to complain when they themselves displaced those that were there before them. Again, that has nothing to do with the main point of this blog. It is not a question of who displaced whom, or who got there first. Rather, it is a question of what they did once they displaced those who were there before them and how they treated those who remained. Its all about ENTITLEMENT and lack of diversity (one blogger even stated that the influx of wealthy white suburbanites made the South End more diverse, making me wonder if perhaps she wore her Uggs too tight).

As I've mentioned before, I can recall delivering meals a decade ago to elderly people living in public housing in the neighborhood. It might not have been as much fun as going shopping for heirloom tomatoes or swigging down a pomegranatini at the newest "brasserie," but I enjoyed it. I had friends who delivered meals, medicines and just their company to AIDS patients in the neighborhood. I had a boyfriend who volunteered with his friends in a homeless shelter's soup kitchen, as opposed to complaining that formerly homeless people would be moving into transitional housing on his (not even so nice) street. I had friends who planted flowers in those wooden half-barrels you see on sidewalks in the neighborhood. As a thank you for his planting efforts, my friend's Section 8-housed neighbor baked him a plate of brownies and they knew each other by name.

All of these activities were to make the neighborhood a better place for everyone, including those who were there before them. The people who were here ten, seven, five years ago realized that charity is about helping others less fortunate than themselves. Contributing $362,000 to a dog park for your own use is not charity. It is self-centeredness. You can be sure that most of the people who donated that money would never have dropped a penny had the request been for new textbooks for the local schools.

Keeping your neighbors awake shouting after your dog in the hallway while you throw tennis balls at him at 3:30 am on a Tuesday night is not a neighborly thing to do. Blasting your stereo speakers outside your Waltham Street (a/k/a Fraternity Row) windows at 2 am on a weeknight is not neighborly. Calling your neighbors "fudge packers" after they have warned you about not picking up after your dog is not neighborly (or particularly safe for you and your dog if it happens within my presence). Commenting to your spouse that you are you annoyed with the copies of Bay Windows left in your pricey condo building's lobby ("why do these have to be here?") is not conducive to forming a bond with those who were there before you. Tsk-Tsk-ing to your wife in front of the Movie Place's shirtless torsos (while wearing a pastel-colored sweater tied around your shoulders) is an affront to (almost all of) my senses. Maybe your wife won't suspect anything when you go out to "walk the dog" at 11pm if you disparage gay people (i.e, the Larry Craig syndrome).

For those of you who think that this blog has something against straight people, you could not be more mistaken. Some of my best friends are straight AND they agree with the sentiments expressed on this blog and in the article. The difference is that the straights who were here circa 1997 did not make comments like the ones set forth above. They knew that the South End was a diverse neighborhood and that included gay people, who were also their friends. They tried to set up their gay friends with other gay friends (successfully in my case) and their sensibilities were not the least bit offended by displays of gay affection. When their gay friends kissed goodbye, they carried on and they didn't stare out the window of their local fish market-martini bar (or whatever the hell it is) in absolute horror when a group of gay men pecked each other on the cheek goodnight (see earlier posting).

It saddens me to see that there are only a handful of gay-owned and operated businesses left in the South End when there used to be dozens. (Note: If the Eagle ever closes, which I hope it will not, if only to annoy the pretentious Atelier dwelling yups across the street, I will call for a big gay "kiss-in" on the sidewalk on Tremont Street in protest). It also saddens me that what used to be a vibrant artistic community is becoming a shadow of its former self, artists having been displaced by luxury condos and high rents. The remaining artists can only be successful by selling what I call "sofa art," which is art marketed to bland suburbanites to match their bland living rooms ("Harold, this painting of a hummingbird sucking nectar out of a flower would look beautiful over our sectional!!). Too safe!! Living in a luxury condo named after an artists workshop does not an art community make. Even if they do reserve a couple of units for "artistes."

This clarification has me thinking about what types of behaviors, people and things I've noticed since the yuppie onslaught which I had never noticed prior thereto:

People in new Audis (or the equivalent) driving the wrong way down one way streets (the corner of Shawmut and Waltham, particularly) and giving pedestrians the finger when it is pointed out that they are going the wrong way.
Signs on shopkeeper's doors and on chained bicycles imploring people not to let their dogs pee (or worse) on said doors and vehicles. I know one shopkeeper who must regularly warn his dog walking passers by that it is uncouth to allow a dog to defecate in the entryway of a business.
Emperor's New Clothes restaurants - they can serve crap to unsuspecting morons who will be impressed by the "hip" scenery. The flipside is an almost complete lack of affordable places in which to get a decent meal that doesn't involve "a foam of pea-shoots" or "roulade of truffled goat hoof marrow." The odd noise you hear nightly on Tremont Street is the stampede of South End restaurant owners laughing all the way to the bank.
People in their very early twenties keeping me up until all hours on weeknights because they don't have to work the next day (in mummy and daddy-sponsored luxury condos).
People who feel that they can dictate whether a 7-11 can come into the neighborhood or whether a transitional housing block for formerly homeless people should be allowed on their street.
People who feel that their right to free overnight parking spaces trumps the right of the elementary school which owns those spaces to build a soccer field for its students.
People who feel they should have some input as to what type of art will appear on a city-pledged graffiti wall for inner city youth ("I hope you won't be painting anything offensive on there!").
People who donate lots of money for a dog park when homeless people at a shelter across the street are not guaranteed a place to sleep on a freezing winter's night.
Luxury condominiums popping up like weeds. Do they even build plain ol' condos anymore?
"The third bedroom can be used as a nursery" - until you send little Madison to private school and move to the suburbs, thus keeping the neighborhood transient and root-less.
The phrase "granite, maple and stainless steel" popping up in almost every conversation ad nauseum. Just once I'd like to hear "pumice, balsawood and corrugated tin."
Five-year-olds in restaurants at 11pm, Saturday night (I really need to put DSS on speed-dial) and strollers being pushed into busy streets without regard to traffic while on a cell phone. Ooops!!
People who sell heirloom tomatoes.
Even worse: people who buy heirloom tomatoes.
Bars that require reservations for seats - get this - at the bar.
$50 omelettes.
Velvet ropes.
Boutiques that cater to the Mother of the Bride.
My parents friends Harold and Sylvia from Chestnut Hill.

Maybe the neighborhood is a little safer now (don't tell that to my friends who have been mugged on Washington Street and Columbus Avenue in the past year, or my friends who have experienced car numerous break-ins on Union Park Street by the cathedral), but I think I liked it better when it was more interesting, more accepting, less safe and less pretentious.

Uppity Street....

2007-09-19T03:09:00.000-07:00

Ok, I'm about a month late on this one, but Yvonne Abraham at the Boston Globe did a fantastic piece on August 26th on some yuppie Upton Street (a/k/a "Yupton Street") residents who are afraid of three of their precious brownstones becoming part of the program for homeless people in transition from the Pine Street Inn. See http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2007/08/26/whose_bad_behavior/

Here's where it gets interesting: The subject property is currently a rehab center home to about 80 recovering addicts. The addicts, some of whom transitioned there directly from prison, are moving to bigger facilities elsewhere.

The Pine Street Inn transition folk, however, are people who have proved that they can live independently. There are no sex offenders or drug dealers allowed. Residents can be evicted if they are found to be under the influence or if they cause trouble. There will be an on-site manager, as well. The Boston Police Department has had no complaints about three similar rooming houses already run by the Pine Street Inn in the South End.

Of course, with this being the pretentious South of End, neighbors want those brownstones turned into luxury condos (what else?). According to certain neighbors, the rehab center which currently occupies the brownstones came in about twenty years ago when the South End "was a pit." They say that is "no longer the character of the neighborhood. In fact, the neighbors quoted in the article claim that they will use zoning regulations to fight the project, stating that there is enough money and influence here that it isn't going to happen easily. They also stated that "unlike you and me," "its difficult to tell who these people are."

After I read Abraham's article and my blood stopped boiling, I wondered about the people who live on Yupton Street. Surely they must have noticed by now that they do not live on Union Park. Of course a sufficient amount of maple, granite and stainless steel has been poured into Yupton Street condos, but its still not that nice a street. It just ain't that pretty. Its kind of narrow and dark. It has beautiful Union Park on one side, but it also backs up to a block or two of assisted housing (and, horror of horrors, poor people). Yupton Street residents need to therefore get over themselves. If they were so fancy, they wouldn't be living there in the first place.

What is it about the new South Enders that makes them think they have the right to dictate what or who their neighbors will be? That's what suburbs are for. In Wellesley, you don't have to worry about a 7-11 moving next door. You don't have to worry about ex-cons living across the street. You don't have to worry about the homeless-in-transition going about their business. You don't have to worry about an elementary school building a soccer field over your (well, actually their) parking spaces. You can't homogenize a city. Diversity is what makes it special.

Then there's the whole issue of the homeless people in transition. These are people who have proven themselves in the face of extreme adversity. A Pine Street spokeswoman sums it up: Why would these people want to get booted out? Being homeless is no picnic and these are people who want to re-start their lives in a positive way. Of course they might not be the types of people who swoon over the new Pottery Barn catalog ("I'm painting my foyer cranberry!"). They might not prance down Waltham Street with a designer shopping bag holding an over-priced heirloom tomato. They probably don't own Uggs and probably won't be seen waiting in line at Stella in a plaid Burberry scarf. They also probably aren't the types of people who drunkenly scream out a window on Waltham Street at 3am. They probably aren't the types who run up and down a hallway screaming at 3am or blasting their stereos out the window at said time. They probably wouldn't sneer and make unevolved comments at a stack of gay newspapers in their lobby. I have witnessed all of these behaviors in the South End in the last two or three years, leaving my senses fighting for the title of most repulsed. As far as I'm concerned, there could be worse people to have on one's street.

Wisteria Lane Comes to The South End....

2007-09-06T10:19:00.000-07:00

Finally there's another chapter in the yuppies vs. kids controversy regarding the soccer field at the Hurley School. As you will recall from previous posts, neighborhood yups were having

a communal hissy fit over the prospect that their free overnight parking spaces would be taken away by the Hurley School in order to provide a soccer field for Hurley schoolchildren (i.e, the children of those people - over there!!).

Despite the fact that the yups had absolutely no claim to the parking lot property, they tried to come up with any argument to avoid the loss of their parking spaces. They argued about safety, late-night noise and crime, and aesthetic appeal (apparently the preservation of an asphalt lot strewn with broken glass, condoms and needles was appealing enough).

Well, apparently the South End Landmarks Commission has approved the final plan for the soccer field. Of course certain yuppidents voiced outrage that the soccer field would incorporate astro-turf as its primary surface material -- this in an historic neighborhood, of all places!! Of course the broken down glass-shard and condom covered asphalt parking lot was precisely what the 19th century planners of the South End neighborhood had in mind. Apparently that was ok, but astro-turf somehow will clash with those Pottery Barn-Inspired pieces your decorator picked out with you at Homegoods.

Apparently, the Commission denied the proposal to use a chainlink fence around the soccer field because it did not fit in with the character of the neighborhood. which begs the question: What exactly is the character of the neighborhood? Last time I checked, it was a city. Complete with cafes and check-cashing businesses, bistros and laundromats, heirloom tomato purveyors and sub shops.

I have read one blogger's report from the Commission's meeting in which it was allegedly decided that a "ribbon picket fence" would be approved. That frightens me. The suburban mindset responsible for thinking that a soccer field in the heart of a city should be surrounded by a white picket fence instead of chainlink is the same mindset that a) has too much time on its hands, and b) offends me with its pre-conceived and dictatorial notions of bland suburban taste.

This is probably the same group of people who tried to prohibit the new-ish 7-11 from opening on Washington Street back in 2003. Apparently, these Wonder-bread eating Wellesley transplants felt that a 7-11 would ruin the integrity of their empty-nester suburban dreams. (Translation: It might attract poor people and we really don't need to be running into those people when we are walking our dogs ). Of course I looked at it as a welcome opportunity to buy toilet paper and a pint of Haagen Dazs at 11 p.m. Did their maple granite and stainless steel kitchens come with the option to magically replenish their cupboards at any given time? Why didn't my decorator give me that option when I was choosing granite colors?

Here's the deal: You live in a city. Get over yourselves. As long as there's not a crack house operating next door, you should consider yourself lucky.

One more thing: Funny how the soccer field for inner city children (of the human species) had a lower budget than the hallowed dog park/dog fountain/doggie walk of fame at nearby Peter's Park. Where are our priorities????

Boston's Newest Suburb: The South End

2007-09-06T09:55:00.000-07:00

I have mixed feelings over the news this week that the Waltham Tavern has been sold to a developer and will be built into condo's.

On the one hand, I am relieved and thrilled that there won't be any pretentious purveyors of heirloom tomatoes moving in, or fabulous new "bistro's," or high end home design stores (owned by actual "designers"!!) for people with Pottery Barn "tastes" (and also, incongruously, loft-like residences). Didn't Boston shop/restaurant keepers of note know that there are at least three banks within a short walk to which they could have laughed all the way?

On the other hand, there are condo's (presumably of the "luxury" kind) going in. That means more yuppies in the neighborhood. (I am intrigued, however, by the fact that one unit will be a studio -- how many times have you seen a newly constructed studio in this neighborhood?). People, I ask you this: How much more maple, granite and stainless steel can the South End stand before it starts to creak, buckle, and finally implode upon itself? I hope the residents are haunted by the ghosts of Waltham Tavern regulars nightly, as in some 70's horror movie, only because those "regulars" would probably be the last people they would ever have run into in real life.

Despite the fact that the Waltham might have been frequented by, well, some of the more alcohol-friendly residents of the South End, my experience living right nearby was that the patrons leaving were alot quieter and well-behaved than the annoying Ugg-wearing binge-drinkers that frequented a late-hours bar/restaurant just about a block down the road. My gentle sleep had been interrupted on a regular basis from the younger patrons of this place just after last call almost on a nightly basis, whereas I never had to hear the shrill voices of fratgirls and boys screaming about how drunk they were (and the occasional vomiting spell) emanating from the Waltham regulars who pretty much just kept to themselves....

I Just Said Goodbye To A Bargain....

2007-08-31T05:28:00.000-07:00

Although technically not a "South End" issue, Filene's Basement, the original downtown crossing branch, closes its doors today, leaving many loyal shoppers including myself heartbroken.

I once worked right across the street from the Basement and found myself there almost on a daily basis. I have been known to hide a pair of men's shoes in ladies' bras overnight so I could grab them at 7:30 the next morning when they hit 75% off. I have also wound up with fabulous $600 fur-lined Prada men's bedroom slippers that were almost my size. Somehow, in a bargain-induced frenzy, I once also wound up with Armani ski pants because they were 75% off - and I don't ski.

According to spokespersons for the company, the store will re-open in two years or so in another location, but many think that it'll never happen. What will replace this mecca of bargains? "Luxury" condominiums, of course, this being Luxurious Boston. "Luxury" is apparently the new "black."

The problem(s) I have with this closure are myriad. First, the new Filene's Basement on Boylston Street, like the suburban locations of "FB", cannot hold a candle to the original. Too many New England Patriots leather logo jackets and "Harvard" t-shirts for my taste, not enough Gucci.

Second, I am becoming (and this is where I can bring in the good ol' South of End) increasingly wary of any condominium building labelled as "Luxury." Apparently, the "L-Word" attracts the wrong kind of people - people who don't need people, if you get my drift. People for whom Luxury is disproportionately related to manners and good social behavior. I have lived in a "Luxury" condo building in the South End and found that a majority of the other inhabitants could use a few lessons in etiquette - such as not running up and down the halls in a drunken stupor screaming at 3 am, or partying on the terrace at 3am right beneath the windows of sleeping residents (see previous postings). Plus, they have a predisposition for wearing Uggs and buying overpriced heirloom tomatoes. In short, they need to have the word "Luxury" added to their residences for show, and to remind themselves that they are technically (only technically, though) no longer living in a frat house.

And, as long as its luxury condo's going in, why hasn't MassHousing upped the ante by lending/diverting $20 million to the developer, earmarked for low-cost rental units, despite the fact that they are luxury condominiums? When will that happen, this being Boston.

Third, the disappearance of the original FB is the loss of one more thing that makes Boston unique. In two years, this city will look like a generic copy of any other US city. Might as well be in Fargo, Trenton or Springfield. There was something about the original FB - the lack of organization, the decor that hadn't changed for decades - that made it special. The new FB's look like they could be any Marshall's, TJ Maxx, or Macy's - the same light fixtures, the same stone floors, etc. Plus, the "running of the brides" bridal gown event just won't be the same in Framingham. And now if I hide a pair of men's shoes in the ladies bra department, I'm just simply a pervert as there is no automatic markdown system in the remaining stores.

Once these new condos are built, perhaps we could re-name the area starting at downtown crossing and continuing up through the proposed Columbus Center "Generia," the soul-less spine of new Boston.

Greed, Part I....

2007-08-29T15:45:00.000-07:00

After winning a "Best of Boston" prize as the best neighborhood dry cleaner, South End Cleaners and Tailors on Tremont Street got something else - a rent increase of almost double.

According to the Boston Globe, the landlord, after serving an eviction notice, informed the award-winning owners that he would be taking over the space and opening his own dry cleaning business. This, even though the landlord has no dry-cleaning experience. This yutz/landlord has seemingly forgotten about what makes a neighborhood business, and particularly a business that has won a "best of" award, successful - something called "goodwill."

"Goodwill" is the likelihood that the business owner will let someone pick up his shirts even after that someone has forgotten his wallet, allowing for payment next time. Goodwill is making sure that someone gets her dress back a day earlier than it would usually be ready because someone really needs it for a special occasion. Goodwill is not knocking a hard-working business owner out of the ring so that you can take over - you can't really buy goodwill. It has to be earned. Greedy landlords don't deserve it.

And in the bigger scheme, the loss of a well-liked neighborhood dry cleaner is just another loss that suffocates a neighborhood of its soul. The dry cleaning plastic bags on my shirts that warn against the "danger of suffocation" were more appropriate than I thought. Anyone notice a theme happening in the South End?

Where Is The Outrage????

2007-08-26T04:44:00.001-07:00

MassHousing, a state agency created to help provide affordable housing, has violated its own guidelines by awarding more than $20 million in development loans to the Columbus Center project.

The purpose of the MassHousing loans is to encourage affordable RENTAL housing. Somehow, the funds (i.e., our taxpayer dollars) have been allocated to this project to subsidize multi-million dollar condominiums. That's alot of granite, maple and stainless steel!! Kudos to House Speaker Sal DiMasi for being the only one with the cojones to speak out against this travesty.

Its funny to see the other politicians try to make excuses for this outrageous scheme, such as Dianne Wilkerson's attempt to justify it with some explanation about how we all will benefit from the green parks that will result and the thousands of construction jobs. While those are certainly positive things, they still do not address the fact that loans from the state which were specifically designated for affordable rental housing, have somehow (payola maybe?) wound up being diverted to yuppie condo's.

As for the project itself, I have no problem with multimillion dollar condos. If some developer wants to add another several hundred units of blonde, bland, Burberried and boring yup's to the mix that is the South End/Back Bay, then so be it. The South End has already turned into a soul-less shadow of its formerly interesting self. Maybe we could get a few more overpriced Emperor's New Clothes-type restaurants for the expense account or Chestnut Hill set ("Health codes be damned - there's a line of Mercedes Sedans parked in front!!") -- see Boston Globe article, August 26, 2007, http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2007/08/26/high_end_fare_with_side_order_of_violations/

Of course, I wouldn't want to live in Bay Village during the construction of the project. Last I heard, 24-hour overnight construction was in the works - enjoy your sleeping now if you live in Bay Village - it might be your last chance. Stock up on rat killer, as well, as all that construction will only serve to stir up an already huge rat population.

My big, overall question is why no one, other than one Boston Globe writer, see http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2007/08/22/state_agency_ignores_own_guidelines_in_condo_loans/, and House Speaker DiMasi, has addressed this issue. Are the people of Boston too apathetic, stupid or drunk to care about such an issue? If this had happened in, say, New York, the Times would have been filled with letters to the editor, editorials, op-ed pieces, etc. calling for the resignation of the head of the state agency. But not here in transient Boston. Why care about this issue when after his next bonus, Biff and Jennifer will pack up Casey and Madison and move out to one of the "W" suburbs?...

My Dog Park's Better Than Yours....

2007-08-12T11:07:00.000-07:00

According to my bible, The South End News, the Peter's Park Dog Facility Performing Arts Espresso Bar & Day Spa Complex is almost nearing completion. In addition to the $250,000 already raised, yuppie proponents of the facility expect to raise another $50,000 or so. That's $300,000. I'd bet my life that the contributors to this development, if asked for money to, say, pay for a local school educational program, would have picked up their pooches, Burberry leashes coiled around their fists, and high-tailed it outta there faster than you could say "oooh, I love your Uggs."

According to the article, the park will be covered with something known as "Peastone," although my 3rd-grade level sense of humor compels me to insert some pun about "Pee" stone right about here. I am certainly waiting for the grand opening (or, "unleashing") (I'm not kidding, that's what they're calling it) of the new park sometime in October, as well as upcoming protests by other pet owners (one Rutland Square cat owner has already sought legal advice to require a certain amount of square-footage for cat owners and their cats).

Rumor has it that the park will include a dog bakery/cafe/bistro/boulangerie/espresso bar, a doggie spa, a doggie fountain, a doggie boutique and salon, dog therapists, a dog personal trainer service, a personal shopping service for dogs, a doggie amphitheater, and a state of the art wireless internet service for dogs. There will also be dog yoga and dog pilates classes, as well as "doggie and me" "dogrobics" classes for dog owners and their pets.

I'm quite certain that, as one of my readers once pointed out, that the Dog Park will bring together all of the different elements of the South End "Community." Translation: It'll bring together old yuppies, young yuppies, straight yuppies, and gay yuppies. If your kitchen isn't at least maple, granite and stainless steel, the honour of your presence is not requested.

Wanna Rumble With the Beehive?...

2007-07-15T16:23:00.000-07:00

I'm back. After a long vacation that ended with an unplanned even longer vacation, as well as a fixed computer, I've got my Uggs on and I'm ready to ease into blogging once again. Remember, I've been away from a neighborhood where people still wear Uggs, heirloom tomatoes can still form the basis for a retail establishment, infant-filled strollers are used as battering rams amidst heavy traffic and the median age is twenty -- so please bear with me as I get back into a South End state of mind.

While I was away (dining on NON-heirloom tomatoes, to boot) I seem to have missed out on the "buzz" about the South End's "hippest" new restaurant, The Beehive. In the interest of full disclosure, I have not been to this shining gem in the necklace that is restaurant row. However, I have seen the velvet ropes and ear-pieced bouncer and almost wet myself. I am quite certain that a bouncer is necessary to protect the South End's numerous VIP's from the riff-raff. (On second thought, maybe some long-time, original South Enders paid for this service to direct the riff-raff away from us and into the restaurant). How exclusive is this chic new haunt? Well, let's just say that my parents friends, "Morty and Sylvia Rosenbloom" (names have been changed to protect them from the ignominy of appearing in this blog) from Chestnut Hill have already been and loved, loved, loved it!! Now that's hip.

Also, some of the guys from my friend's law firm have already been there on the ol' expense account. They did report back that the "drinks were great." (I am of the opinion that in Boston, to have a successful restaurant, all you need are good drinks -- food is really secondary or even tertiary).

For this they need a velvet rope?

Don't get me wrong, I'm thrilled that the South End finally has somewhere other than Franklin Cafe for late-night dining, and in theory I would certainly want to patronize someplace that has Berklee Music School students playing jazz. Its just that the whole velvet rope thing should be left to places like New York's famous Scores strip club, circa 1992. Only here could that type of thing appeal to the pretentious boobs of the New South End.

On a related note, for exactly which VIP's are the velvet ropes meant? In Boston, apparently VIP means the occasional newscaster, hairdresser of newscasters, New England Patriot, wife of New England Patriot, car dealership owner, or owner of small chain of donut shops. Oh the glamour of it all!!

Sorry....

2007-06-18T14:07:00.000-07:00

To all my faithful readers: I have been on an extended vacation (far from the South End) and somehow fried my computer upon my return. As soon as I am back online (and not on a friend's computer) I will add some new posts. Its been weeks since I've seen a pair of Uggs or heard the clip clop of entitled people on cobblestone.

In the meantime, won't someone open up a dog-rolfing clinic or an heirloom dandelion store? I could use some material....

Please Pack Up Your Rainbow Flags....

2007-05-24T15:25:00.000-07:00

I was away recently for a couple of weeks but when I returned, I immediately asked my sources on the street and perused the South End News to see what I had missed while I was away. It was with great sadness that I learned of the passing of what appears to be the very LAST gay-themed business in the South End, The Movie Place. Now the very special residents of Atelier 450 (almost one-half of whom are able to actually pronounce the name of their residence) will no longer be forced to look out (with or without binoculars) over this antithesis to "family values."

The owner, lending an air of credence to this very blog, stated that they were leaving "because the neighborhood has changed..[i]f you go up and down Tremont Street, you'll find very few businesses that are catering to a gay clientele...[t]here's really nothing left except the Eagle." He added that the primary demographic had changed to "suburban transplants" and "young couples with children." Rumors are flying that an interior design firm will be taking over the space (presumably offering "Crate and Barrel looks at Versailles prices").

Alarmingly, he also remarked that he had heard through the grapevine that some neighbors were not pleased with the business. I had witnessed that first-hand one evening, when I saw two suburban couples, sweaters tied around the necks of the men, stop and pause in front of the window of the Movie Place, presumably while they waited for a table at one of the neighborhood's more insipid dining establishments. They shook their heads in disbelief and disgust at the magazine covers bearing photos of shirtless (not pantsless) men. I would imagine that Biff and Muffy had quite alot to discuss on the way back to Wellesley!!

Its just plain sad that some people want this neighborhood to be whitewashed into a homogenous (yet homo-free) image of suburbia, just like where they came from. Having spent a large portion of my life in the New York City area, I remember when people were just happy that their next door neighbor wasn't a methadone clinic or a shooting gallery. People there would have breathed a collective sigh of relief if a gay video rental business had moved in. But not here in the S. of End, of course, where everyone apparently should be straight, white, look exactly the same as their neighbors and drive a Range Rover.

R.I.P. The Movie Place, Mildred's, Rave, We Think the World of You. Metropolitan Health Club, The South End Geoffrey's, etc.

300 Square Feet, Magnificent Dog Park Views....

2007-05-10T21:29:00.000-07:00

This magnificent space in a prime South End location is (or perhaps was) for sale. Imagine building your own South End townhouse, pied a terre or artist's loft!! The possibilities are endless!!

Actually, I can't figure out if it is for sale or has already been sold. There was a realtor's sign planted on the property for some time, which is now knocked over and lying in the dirt. Either it was sold or more likely someone with common sense kicked it down, overcome with disgust upon the realization that pretty much any plot of land in this part of town, no matter how small or poorly-located, will sell to someone. As my mom used to say (and generally not in a complimentary way), "every pot has its lid". In this case, every last available square foot of South End property has its Uggs-wearing buyer.

Any ideas for what "endless possibilities" (South End realtorese for "we don't know what the hell to do with it, either") await this prime piece of land? Could it possibly be used for anything other than motorcycle parking? I can only dream as to the following:

An heirloom tomato shoppe. A nail salon. An au pair suite. Valet stroller parking concession. Foie Gras "R" Us. "Artist Loft-style" condos for very small people. A dog-rolfing spa. A dog bar.

Readers are invited to submit their own suggestions.

Charity Begins At (Your 3,000 Square Foot) Home....

2007-04-24T19:41:00.000-07:00

A South End couple ran the Boston Marathon last week and raised almost $29,000 for Children's Hospital. I applaud them (although I will not mention their names not so much as to protect their privacy as so that they don't have to suffer the ignominy of being associated with this blog). That's what the spirit of charity is all about, i.e., giving to others for the benefit of others.

This is the opposite of, say, donating money for a plaque depicting your deceased dog so that you (and your "rebound" dog) and other yuppie dog owners can mingle (owners) and run freely (dogs, presumably). In the former paragraph, we have selfless people raising money for others (unmet children) and in the latter we have people raising money for their own benefit (and secondarily, the benefit of other yuppie dog owners). Notice the subtle difference.

Of course the dog-owners, like the Hurley School "parking-entitled" will try to come up with any plausible explanation - "the children benefit from a well-appointed dog park," (of course the children have no safe and clean portion of the park) "the dog park people are a diverse cross section of the South End," (yes: wealthy gays, wealthy straights, wealthy old, wealthy young, wealthy black, wealthy white). I don't buy it. Donating money to a dog park when there are homeless people fighting for shelter space one block away is repugnant to me. Monies spent on a "doggie walk of fame," when kids in this same area haven't a place to play as safe and clean as neighborhood dogs is a shame.

SOWA, NOWA, EWA, WEWA....

2007-04-10T21:29:00.000-07:00

I have been reeling with the mostly positive comments on this blog since it was featured in last week's South End News. Some of you made some pretty astute observations and others were just plain funny. In any event, it just reassured me that I'm not going crazy and that there are others out there who feel the same way.

This week, I started thinking about SOWA (see previous posts for what I really think it stands for) and SOHA. What about people who live on just plain WA? Can they still have their own acronym? I thought of some more South End acronyms and I invite readers to some up with their own in the comments section. Not limited to just acronyms, mine are the following:

HeTo (the heirloom tomato district, corner of Waltham and Tremont) (Which actually sounds like "HeTerO," which is probably more appropriate now that I think of it);

DoWiMac (stands for "Double Width Maclaren" district);

Uggia (city of Uggs);

CoBa (Coach Bag district);

ObExpOm ("Obscenely Expensive Omelette" district);

GraMaSt ("Granite Maple Stainless Steel" district);

DaBoMyCo ("Daddy Bought My Condo" district).

I have also thought of a new name for yet another condo building in the South of End marketed towards wealthy suburbanites who still want the cachet of the artists who they've driven out of the neighborhood:

IhopethisexpensivepaintingmatchesmysofaBlock450.

From the brochure: Live in a "working artist's" 5 bedroom loft just like the artist you've driven out onto the streets, except with an elevator, doorman, concierge, underground parking, marble bath, built-ins and none of those pesky easels, paints, or chalk!! Impress your friends back on Beacon Hill or in Wellesley by mentioning that you live just like a starving artist in the city!! Bonus points if you know how to pronounce words like "atelier" ("artillery"? "artileer"?).

Priorities of the Overprivileged....

2007-03-21T11:02:00.000-07:00

From today's Boston Globe: South End businesses are coming together to celebrate the first officially sanctioned dog park in the city. South Enders have raised over $160,000 so far for the park, which will include amenities such as "doggie water fountains" and a "walk-of-fame dedicated to deceased canines."

Because that's a priority. For overprivileged yuppies. Of course the announcement to convert a South End parking lot into a soccer field for elementary school children (see previous posts) was met with wrath and almost maniacal opposition by some South End residents. However, a playing field for dogs merits praise and fundraising efforts.

$160,000 plus for doggie fountains and a creepy walk of dead-dog fame, within blocks (if not feet) of how many homeless shelters (you know, those icky places behind the new Sushi restaurant)??!! I guess when a homeless person dies in the South End there's no fanfare, but god forbid some yuppie's dog dies....

Too bad the field in question hadn't previously been a parking lot. The privileged doggie crowd vs. the entitled parking spot crowd. I would have paid good money to see that battle!

Apparently, here in the South of End, dogs are more important than children (you know, those things named Brianna and Madison that you had to get a nanny for). I can only hope that someone's Burberry-plaid leash gets yanked a little too tightly around somebody's Uggs, causing some doggie owner to topple over, whacking his or her head on an embedded brass star on the new dead-doggie walk-of-fame pavement thereby hopefully knocking some sense into it.

Dolce & Eukanuba....

2007-03-08T21:03:00.000-08:00

More proof that this neighborhood is fast becoming the most overprivileged yupp'd out neighborhhod in America: A doggie spa. It's not here yet, but its in the making. Technically a "doggie fitness center," dogs will be able to swim in an 8 by 20 doggie pool, and they will also offer doggie massage and doggie reiki, "a Japanese technique for [doggie] stress reduction and [doggie] relaxation," according to the South End News. Only in the South of End could we have stressed-out dogs. Maybe they're sick of eating beef tenderloin in a morel shiraz goat cheese and pea tendril reduction and just want dog food. Maybe they, like me, can't stand the sight of another pair of Uggs boots or Burberry scarf. Maybe they've just had it with granite, maple and stainless steel.

This would be a fun activity for your dog while you partake of the South End's most expensive omellette ($50.00, includes foie gras) at a certain Tremont Street yupporium and then shop for heirloom tomatoes on Waltham Street! Voila, you're pretentious!!

My question: does the doggie massage come with a "happy ending"? Or is it a "legit" doggie massage spa?

The Emperor's New Omelette....

2007-03-04T15:24:00.000-08:00

I got this choice tidbit of SouthEndia from UniversalHub via On Common Ground. Turns out we here in the South End have been blessed with the addition of a $50.00 omelette at one Tremont Street brunchspot. Apparently, in addition to reeking of smoke due to an open kitchen, diners in this South End mainstay can now impress their Burberry scarf-clad friends by ordering this obscenely-priced egg dish all on Daddy's credit card. The omelette includes a generous helping of foie gras (which I'm pretty certain that anyone living in the new South End wouldn't be able to tell apart from a heaping serving of Alpo). I think it would be a fabulous addition to a Sunday spent visiting million dollar open houses with Mommy and Daddy.

If you listen closely on a Sunday morning, you can almost hear the sound of Uggs-covered feet running to this trendy establishment. Then you can hear the jovial sounds of the owners laughing all the way to the bank.

It Is Reallllllly Over....

2007-02-13T19:49:00.000-08:00

Remember the day when the South End had a gay bookstore, gay-owned, operated and attended gay restaurants, and well, just a whole lotta gay stuff going on? Well, those days are over. The final nail in the coffin is the possibility that this year's Pride Parade might stray from its usual course and skip the South End altogether. Although the Pride Committee is fighting to keep the parade route status quo, construction on Columbus Ave. and Clarendon Street might thwart that plan, diverting the parade to a beacon hill/back bay route (and just to clarify, I do not suggest in any way that the Pride Committee has anything whatsoever to do with the possible diversion - the committee should be lauded for their efforts this and every year).

They might as well just march in Chestnut Hill.

I don't know which entity is putting up a potential roadblock, and thus where to assign the blame, but apparently someone might draw the conclusion that the South End isn't gay enough anymore to have a pride parade coursing through its well-heeled streets. A parade through Beacon Hill just doesn't quite cut it - the camaraderie along Tremont Street during a pride parade is unmistakable and cannot be duplicated in Beacon Hill, Commonwealth Avenue, South Boston, Saugus or wherever the hell they think they're going to move it. It sure send a message....

Well, we wouldn't want little Madison and Skyler in the dual Maclaren having to see gay people kissing while Megan and the new mommy group jockey for a table at Picco, would we? And poor Bernie and Estelle Fleishman over in Atelier 505, they shouldn't have to see the homos from their balcony. What those people do in the privacy of their own bedrooms is fine, but they don't have to flaunt it in front of our building. Or in front of the Butcher Shop window seats or anywhere in the South End where decent Uggs-wearing, Burberry scarf-toting, polar fleece-ensconced straight people congregate.

Last homo to leave, please pack up the rainbow flag.

The Hurley School....Part III....

2007-01-30T14:51:00.000-08:00

The parking lot/soccer field yuppie debacle worsened this week. Last Week's letters section of the South End news showed us even more arguments from entitled South Enders against a proposed soccer field on the school's own property. (For those readers unfamiliar with the debate, please see previous posts). A sampling of the spurious rationales the neighboring yups are trying to use to support their argument to keep their overnight parking spaces in the school's lot are as follows:

1. There are other "grass playing fields nearby"; parents should consider sending their kids to schools in the suburbs that have "plush playing fields".

Somehow, I think that where the school has 79% of its kids enrolled in free or reduced price lunch programs (its a predominantly low income school), sending the kids to that exclusive private school in Weston is not an option. Of course if you are a South End Entitled Yuppie Asshole ("SEEYA"), and you haven't got a clue how the other half lives, and you've sent little Kyler, Brianna and Harrison to the Miss Whitebread Boarding School in one of the suburbs beginning with "W", then why should you?

2. If we can't park there, then teachers shouldn't be able to park on our streets "except in two-hour visitor spots".

This is perhaps my favorite SEEYA argument. Those obnoxious teachers, with their sub-poverty salaries!! Damn them to hell!! They're already in the most thankless and underpaid profession in our society - let's dump on them even more. Of course when they interfere with your God-given right to free South End Parking, they become the enemy. Let's make it even tougher to attract good teachers for those other people's kids.

3. If anyone plays on that soccer field past 8pm, "I will call the police!"

Way to intimidate a bunch of 3rd graders!! 8pm is probably their bedtime, fool! Of course this concerned resident probably looks the other way when the current parking lot attracts hookers and drug dealers. That's ok, as long as I can still park in my spot!!

4. "These kids have many parks within walking distance; I don't see the need for kids that age to have a soccer field."

I don't know about you, but I'm not sure if I want my 2nd grader walking all over this town looking for a playing field. The nearest one is what, Blackstone Park? "Excuse me, group of homeless wino's, can my friends and I play soccer here?" Perhaps they could use Titus Sparrow Park (where the older teenagers will be unlikely to give up a field for kids half their age).

Apparently, the SEEYA's are pinning their argument on some sort of an alleged "agreement" they had several years ago with the previous principal of the school whereby they think in exchange for helping out clean up a lot outside the school or a bake sale or something, they have the right to free parking in perpetuity. Even a reader of this blog commented that he or she sees neighborhood folk cleaning the school yard and helping kids navigate the traffic. Yeah, right. The yup's in this neighborhood would sooner push a kindergardner to the ground in order to get to their caramel macchiatto three seconds sooner. They need to get used to two things: one: the word "no", and two: that sometimes they don't come first.

Where to put my Volvo (Part 2)....

2007-01-17T21:31:00.000-08:00

In my last posting, I discussed the ongoing clash over a proposed new soccer field at the Hurley School in the South of End. In a nutshell, the school wants to take down a parking lot to make way for a soccer field for its students and the surrounding yuppies are in an uproar over losing "their" parking spaces (which in actuality belong not to them but to the school). Although with this being the South End, the neighboring residents feel a certain sense of entitlement (which applies to most non-parking lot issues as well).

I was perusing an issue of the South End News and I have compiled a list of the reasons these yuppies are giving in order to protect their parking spaces, which begs the question: Wasn't there a logical reasoning section on the LSAT's??!! (assuming that at least 50% of the current yup-enders went to law school).

1. Residents who have been renting their parking spaces will lose rental income when they have to take back their spaces for their own use. As I see it, if you live here and own a parking space, I can't feel much sympathy for your financial situation. Maybe a few less dinners at Stella and Aquitaine can make up for the loss of income.

2. As the lot is withing close range of residences, the neighbors are "wondering" what will be the impact of noise and lighting. I guess we've all heard about those elementary school students and their midnight pickup soccer games. I have a feeling that a bunch of 7-year-olds playing soccer will not affect the evening rituals of most adults in the South End. This is another subterfuge for " we don't want to lose our constitutionally-mandated right to overnight parking in the South End."

3. Neighbors are asking if a playing field is the best proposed use for recreational space for the children. No, a crack dealership would be good too, but apparently some industrious souls in the neighborhood have already thought of that one.

4. Is the proposed field going to to have an appearance that is an asset to the community rather than an eyesore? Yeah, bud, the parking lot is really pretty....That green grass associated with soccer fields is just offensive. Personally, I like the way that broken glass sparkles on the asphalt now.

Maybe they should just have valet parking for S.E. residents?!! I think that could work.

That's MY Parking Space!!....

2007-01-08T20:20:00.000-08:00

Has anyone read about the big kerfuffle surrounding the Hurley School parking lot right here in the South of End? Apparently, the school has the audacity to want to convert its parking lot (used as residents parking overnight) for use as a soccer field for its students. Imagine - one of its own parking lots - for an activity which would increase the overall physical health and well-being of its students!! And quite possibly instill a higher sense of achievement which might, in turn, lead to keeping south End youth off the streets!! The nerve!! Where are junior- associate-Biff and new-mom-Megan supposed to park the Volvo wagon and the Pathfinder?

What is this neighborhood coming to when South End residents are denied their God-given right to convenient city parking?!! Do you know how difficult it'll be to drag a folded up Maclaren stroller, a Whole Foods bag, a Caramel Macchiatto Frappucino and an infant or two those extra blocks when we could have just parked right across the street from the brownstone for which mumsy and daddy so nicely gave us the down payment?!! Its madness!!

What next? A by-law prohibiting heirloom tomatoes in the South End? Next thing they'll do is try to take away our foie gras and we'll all end up marrying our dogs in this crazy South of End.

Seriously, though, it reminds me of when they announced that there would be a 7-11 on posh Washington Street, across from the luxury condominium Wilkes Passage and right under Rollins Square condominiums (most of which achieve some level of luxuriousness, as well). It seems that many of the newly arrived (and I mean that in every possible sense of the phrase) condo dwellers were up in arms over a freakin' 7-11 coming in, and presumably bringing with it - yes, you guessed it: poor people. There were anti -7-11 signs in windows, community meetings, etc. Meanwhile, I was the only pro-7-11 person in the entire South of End. If someone wants to sell me a pint of Haagen Dazs, an emergency roll of Cottonelle, the National Enquirer and a lottery ticket at 11:00 pm, then bless them.

Of course, having spent a good portion of my life in and around the New York area, I think that most other city dwellers are happy if they don't have a crack house or a methadone clinic moving across the street. But not here in Boston's newest suburb, the South End.

Apparently, when you've just moved here from Wellesley, Beacon Hill, or your dorm at B.C., a 7-11 is seen as offensive to your suburban sensibilities. I mean, they took valuable retail space away from what could have been a nail salon, a bank, or (and my eyes are welling up as I write this) an heirloom tomato purveyor!!

Now where the hell do I park my Hummer?!!

Somethin' Ain't Right....

2007-01-05T12:39:00.000-08:00

Has anyone noticed that there are more and more Britney Spears look-alikes in the South of End lately? Also a preponderance of surgically-enhanced Joan Rivers look alikes? Is it just me or does it seem that every dentist's wife from Chestnut Hill is poking about the South of End lately??!! And really, who can blame them from our fabulous overhyped restaurants to our heirloom tomato vendors, the South of End is where its at. Oh, and last artist/musician/homo/middle or lower income person to leave, please don't forget to pack your paintbrushes/guitar/rainbow flag/and/or turn out the lights.

Burberry Scarf/Uggs Counts

2006-12-19T18:20:00.000-08:00

I have figured out that unfortunately the spell of warmer weather we have been having here in the South of End has been the only factor invloved in keeping the Burberry Scarf and Uggs couts so low this season. I had hoped that perhaps Bostonians had looked up from their Blueberry Coolada's and finally realized that both trends are over everywhere else on Earth. As I had suspected, with the return of the cold weather, came the return of both vile Boston trends. Today's count on Tremont Street: Burberry Scarves: 3, Uggs 2 (pairs).

36 Hours in the South of End

2006-12-19T17:50:00.000-08:00

Someone anonymously left a comment on one of my postings regarding not one but two new bistros coming into the building currently under construction at the corner of Washington Street and Union Park in the South of End. Of course, both will have valet parking. How sad that a)apparently the majority of new businesses that keep popping up in the "End" are restaurants, and b) pretentious ones at that. It seems that for every new yuppified restaurant that pops up around here, one of the affordable ones disappears. Of course there are a few affordable restaurants left, but I'm not going to let on as they're hard enough to get into already, they have enough screaming children running about, and if I see another Burberry-clad soccer mom from Wellesley or group of fresh-faced, expense account associates from Ropes and Grey looking extremely out of place here, I'm going to go insane.

It reminded me of an article which appeared in the travel section of the New York Times this summer, entitled "36 Hours in the South End." In the article, they listed a bunch of restaurants (of course) as well as new and noteworthy shops, such as Motley, Turtle, Aunt Sadie's, etc. The problem was that they actually made it sound like there was a thriving retail culture going on here. Usually when the NY Times does one of their 36 Hours reports, one gets the sense that if six stores are listed in the article, there are countless other similar ones in between and that the Times has just selected a few to get you started.

What this particular article failed to mention is that while the stores listed really are great stores (in that they are locally-owned and actually have interesting merchandise), they are pretty much the ONLY stores around. Yep, if you started out at Motley Home, continued onto regular old Motley, then hit Turtle, Aunt Sadie's, Fresh Eggs, and.....wait, I can't think of any others, you'd have a LOT of time to kill to round out 36 hours. Of course you could have brunch, lunch and dinner, but they failed to inform that basically the sidewalks roll up around 10:00 on weeknights. Not counting food, and unless you were missing a few chromosomes, you could probably do the town in more like 36 minutes. Of course you could kill a few hours searching for the perfect heirloom tomato you know where....

Mayhem In Our Streets....

2006-12-05T13:29:00.000-08:00

From the South End Crime Beat: Last Friday night, a drive-by "saffroning" occurred in front of Aquitaine Restaurant on Tremont Street. Witnesses say they saw a late model Range Rover slow down in front of the well-known establishment in the center of "Restaurant Row" and then they heard the unmistakable sound of saffron threads hitting the pavement. Law enforcement officials are also speculating that the same perpetrator was involved in a drive-by "creme-fraiching" that took place on Thursday evening a few blocks away near Formaggio's on Shawmut avenue. Although no one was injured in either attack, several diners found saffron threads in dishes that did not really call for the subtle, buttery-yellow flavor, and residents of the "Eight Streets" neighborhood are calling for additional dining protection. One resident, who asked to remain anonymous, stated "until we find out who did this, we all have creme fraiche on our hands".

It is not known whether this spree is related to this summer's "Foie Gras" incident on Union Park in which several parked cars were targeted with inferior quality versions of the tasty goose liver pate. Residents are being asked to dine in groups, not alone, and to be extra-vigilant while dining and even making reservations.

Random Acts of Mis-Fashion

2006-11-30T11:29:00.000-08:00

The Valentino boutique on Newbury Street has been broken into twice this week. Clearly the perpetrators could not have been from Boston. I mean come on, who wears Valentino in the land of the Blueberry Coolada?!! I would imagine it would be a little too easy for law enforcement to spot someone wearing Valentino among the polar-fleeced masses.

Also, overheard at the Museum of Fine Arts "Fashion Show: Paris Collections 2006" exhibit this weekend: Where would you ever wear these things? Personally, I didn't think that there was anything on exhibit so unusual that it couldn't have been worn somewhere. Just really elegant and well-designed clothing. It would have had a place in NY, LA, Chicago, Miami and abroad. Just not here, of course. The Santa Fe room at the Hilltop just ain't that fancy!!

"I OWN HERE"

2006-11-16T20:29:00.000-08:00

Yet more proof that this neighborhood has become a playground for the young, straight and overprivileged: Last night, a neighbor who lives two floors beneath me (and has "outdoor space," as they call it) had another one of her parties that I can only assume invloved a keg and several guys in rugby shirts named Sean.

We have some clearly-explained "quiet hours" in our condo doc's. Basically, they state that you can't make any unreasonable noise after 11:00 p.m. Now I'm no prude - I don't care about a party on a weekend, but unfortunately my neighbor (who we will call "Kristen") (because that's her real name) feels the need to polish up her hostess skills on weeknights. So far, I have been awakened by unruly drunken guests and loud music blaring outside on her patio on a Sunday night (ok, Monday morning) at 3:30 a.m., again on a Tuesday at 3:30 am and last night until about midnight (which I guess is an early night for her - I should be thankful).

Turns out it was someone's birthday (Kristen is 21 years old, as I was able to discern) and someone named "Tony" was puking on the patio. All this in a $700,000 condo that mommy and daddy apparently bought for her. I can only hope that Tony puked into her Uggs.

When this happened a few weeks ago at 3:30 am, I shouted out the window and asked her to keep it down, as it was 3:30. Her response? "I OWN here - I can do whatever I want. If you don't like it, shut your f%$#in' window." Who says money can't buy you class?!!

The saddest part is that the (straight) couple that lived there previously could not have been nicer or more considerate. Not only were they ridiculously attractive in a hollywood movie star sorta way, but they mixed freely and socialized with the gay folk in the neighborhood, as well as the straight, the young as well as the old. Now we have another spoiled 21-year old brat in the neighborhood with an attitude typical of the new yuppie influx. Why isn't she living on Comm. ave. in Brighton where she belongs?!!!

Its Worse Than We Thought....

2006-11-05T21:00:00.000-08:00

Rumor has it that the Waltham Street space formerly occupied by gift shop extraordinaire Tommy Tish is in fact now being added to the Butcher Shop/Plum Produce empire. My worst nightmare (see previous post) has come true. "She," however, has allegedly not yet decided on a concept for the space. Thesouthendisover readers are invited to come up with possible suggestions for this small but soon-to-be-swanky piece of prime retail space.

My suggestions: How 'bout not just a high-end produce store, but an extremely high end produce store to pick up where Plum Produce has left off. Instead of a pedestal with, say six (6) heirloom tomatoes, there could be a pedestal with one (1) really high quality heirloom tomato.

Or maybe a very small cafe where purchasers of heirloom tomatoes can relax and contemplate their purchases while nibbling on heirloom tomato snacks and socializing with their fellow high-end produce lovers? How about an Uggs franchise/heirloom tomato emporium? A Maclaren dealership?

Come on - help me out here!!

Another One Gone....

2006-11-02T11:43:00.000-08:00

I was saddened to see that another South End store which catered to both gay and pre-Megan and Sean South Enders suddenly disappeared this week. Tommy Tish, a tiny South End institution, is gone. Did it relocate? Anyone know anything? TT had a great selection of small gifts, wrapping papers and unique cards, from the off-color and funny to the beatiful and hand-made, all in about 40 square feet of space.

One can only hope that it will not go the way of its former neighbor, a tiny antique store that turned into everyone's favorite South End Pretentious Purveyor of Pricey Produce. Hopefully, "She" (as apparently "She" is known to her produce-purveying peons) will not expand her empire any further down Waltham Street (a/k/a "Fraternity Row") (walk down the stretch of Waltham Street on any weekend night and you'll see what I mean by "Fraternity Row" - its about a nanosecond away from keg parties and drunk B.U. students in Togas).

So in about one year, we've lost Tommy Tish and We Think the World of You (a gay bookstore, now a bank). Watch out Aunt Sadie's, you're only a few breaths away from becoming a Chuck E. Cheese.

A clarification....

2006-10-30T08:11:00.000-08:00

Well, finally someone other than myself has finally read this blog. One reader questioned the fact that gentrified gays were compaining about straight gentrification. The story is not gay vs. straight, but rather entitled vs. normal. It just so happens that the new wave of ultra-entitled pricks moving in happen to be straight. Three years ago, the straights and the gays got along in the neighborhood, socialized together, etc. The new entitled brats have no interest in doing that. In fact, I have witnessed very unaccepting (and unacceptable) behavior by my new straight neighbors, from complaining about copies of Bay Windows in various buildings and retail spaces to a bunch of empty nesters "tssk tsssk-ing" about magazines displaying shirtless men in the window of The Movie Place.

The gay population of the South End misses the day when they were accepted and not made to feel like they were on display in a zoo to shocked onlookers. We miss the straight neighbors who made us feel accepted and comfortable. Anybody who didn't know that there was a gay presence (albeit now a diminishing one) here must have been living in a cave.

The new Megan and Sean couples want nothing to do but be close to trendy dining spots, suck more $$ out of mumsy and daddy, push out an unruly tot or two, and then get out of the neighborhood.

I remember a day not too long ago when gay men had planted those wooden half-barrels on streets all over town with flowers to brighten up the neighborhood. I remember when a friend who was responsible for the plantings in several of those barrels was thanked by his neighbors (who lived in Section 8 housing) with a plate of home-baked cookies and the warm cameraderie between these neighbors. Another friend used to visit the elderly in a neighborhood housing project nearby. Somehow I don't think Megan and Sean will be doing anything like that between jaunts to Stella and The Butcher Shop.

But they know how to scream into a cell phone about how drunk they were last night while stumbling down Waltham Street (a/k/a "Fraternity Row") at 2:30 in the morning.

46 Degrees - Its That Time of Year....

2006-10-26T20:17:00.000-07:00

Its 46 degrees outside right now. And in the South of End, that can only mean one thing: Burberry scarf season. Last winter, a friend and I used to amuse ourselves by counting the number of Burberry scarves we'd witness in one South End outing. One day we hit almost 30.

Here's the thing: like the South End itself, they are over. Aside from being completely unoriginal, their status as a staus symbol has diminished to almost nothing. (Note: the rest of the Burberry line is quite nice and respectable - its just those damn scarves). Anyone who has been to the Big Apple knows that Burberry scarf knock-offs are available on almost every streetcorner for about $5 a pop (best of all, the knock offs come in my fave material, polar fleece!! No more itchy wool!!). Moreover, in London (where the brand originated), Burberry scarves have now been relegated to bus drivers, construction workers and janitors at best. As my British friends said, "Only yobs wear them now."

Yobs and Bostonians....

The Long Kiss Goodnight....

2006-10-26T20:02:00.000-07:00

I was out to dinner with 5 other gay men the other night. As we stopped at my favorite (and most pretentious!!) corner in the South End (Tremont & Waltham), we said our gay goodbyes, and like all homos everywhere, each of us gave each a hug and a kiss goodnight. We were appalled by the shocked expressions from the Ugg-wearing "trendsetters" staring at us through the windows of the Butcher Shop. You would think we had given each other a big juicy group blowjob by the looks on their suburban/Back Bay/Beacon Hill faces. Don't guys kiss each other goodnight in Attleboro or Marshfield or wherever they're coming from?

I remember a day not long ago when a kiss goodnight between two homos in the South End was de rigeur and shocking to no one. In fact, prior to the Butcher Shop, a great gay little restaurant named "Rave" occupied that spot, and before that, a gay coffee shop called "Mildred's."

Its enough to make me just want to run home and not even consider buying an heirloom tomato at Plum Produce!!

Peach of a Neighbor....

2006-10-24T17:48:00.000-07:00

Guess which ultra-pretentious South End restaurant-cum-high-end-produce-shop has been allegedly unloading deliveries by having their delivery people rest crates on the hoods and trunks of parked cars by day? I'm not mentioning any names, but if you have one of those plum parking spaces near the corner of Tremont and Waltham Streets, you'd better check for scratches.

Its bad enough that those of us living in the neighborhood have to deal with maniacal valet parkers double and triple parking at that intersection on weekends. Its even worse that we are subjected to all sorts of visual insults when we have to witness the Uggh-clad B.U. students stepping out of those cars to dine there. Now these yuppie purveyors of all things pretentious (ooooh, you have heirloom tomatoes!!) are really showing what great neighbors they are. They get the rotten heirloom tomato award.

Another Thought....

2006-10-16T23:21:00.000-07:00

Which restaurant will be the first to have Valet Stroller Parking?

Just a Thought....

2006-10-16T23:16:00.000-07:00

I think its about time to tell the people what SOWA really stands for: Severely Overprivileged White Assholes.

I don't think that'll make it into the window at Gibson Domain Domain Domain anytime soon.

Random Acts of Entitlement....

2006-10-16T23:02:00.000-07:00

I guess this would be the closest category. Spotted about 1 month ago, on the corner of Waltham and Shawmut: What appeared to be the very blonde and white offspring of some overprivileged yupple (yuppie couple) in a very high-end stroller being pushed by an African American young woman who was probably the nanny. As the woman pushed the little tyke, she yelled into her cell phone just about every obscenity I've ever heard (and I've heard 'em all).

This is by no means a criticism against African Americans or any other minority. In fact, I'd probably choose to spend my free time with the above-referenced nanny rather than a yupple that didn't seem to think careful interviewing was necessary in their choice of child care professional.

On the other hand, I can't wait for next summer's Ropes & Gray family summer outing when junior shouts "listen, motherfucker" to the managing partner. On the ride back to West Canton Street, I 'll bet you'll be able to cut the silence in that Range Rover with a knife!!

Random Acts of Mis-fashion

2006-10-16T15:15:00.000-07:00

Spotted today: Two (2) pairs of Uggs on two (2) different women on Tremont Street. One near Garden of Eden and one near northwest corner of Tremont and Dartmouth. This despite warnings that Uggs were in fact over on Queer Eye for the Straight Guy and both the British and American versions of What Not to Wear at least a year ago. Why is it that a) Boston has a disproportionate number of make-over participants on WNTW and b) the make-over particpants from Boston stand out for their outrageous hideousity?!! Just a thought.

In New York, the first nip in the air brings with it the pleasant "thwump" of a Chanel tweed jacket being buttoned. In Los Angeles, the sexy "whoosh" of a long-sleeved Cavalli blouse. In Boston, its the "whoosh" of unwashed polarfleece and the "thwump" of one's feet going into a pair of Uggs. Uggh.

2006-10-16T15:08:00.000-07:00

Just started blog today - will have much more in weeks to come. Postings will fall into three categories: Random Acts of Entitlement, Pretentious & New, and Local Acts of Mis-fashion. Readers are invited to submit photos of previous incarnations of current South End businesses to show how the neighborhood has been straightened and yuppified beyond repair.