Hacker News Reader

Comment by loggedinmyphone | Hacker News Reader

From 2005-2010 the city had a very positive vibe: we're the most European city in America, we love good food, we have a balance of artists and people who support the arts. Now it's overcrowded, overvalued and overcapitalized. Rather than being welcomed, you will be resented and perceived as pushing other people out. Oakland has a more friendly and creative feel these days, if you can deal with the pervasive criminal element and left-wing monoculture. Plan to make your money and get out.

View on HN

As much as I appreciate the sentiment, Boston is probably the most European city in America stemming from the fact that it was originally built as one.

Having just returned from a trip to 5 European cities in different countries, what does the most European city mean? I also haven't been to Boston, but there were many ethnic enclaves in other American cities that I was reminded of during my time in Europe. But as a whole, the cities were each so distinct, I found many American cities comparable to them than they were to each other.

For one: no grid, walkable streets and bars and restaurants with terasses

The idea of SF as "culturally European" was largely a piece of self-mythologizing, rather than a legitimate comparison. SF saw the rest of the US as the homeland of mindless consumerism (with the exception of their leftist intellectual conception of New York City, ironically; this being before the 2008 financial crisis and Occupy Wall Street), and the residents liked to identify with the Europe they imagined as an Epicurean socialist Utopia. It's similar to the mindset that Austin has in distinguishing themselves from the rest of Texas. Of course many of SF's culturally distinctive qualities, like the noted California-style phony overenthusiasm, are actually very anti-European.

I’m european and have been to both cities. I agree with this statement.

Hard to say if SF is the most "European city in America".

Is it that case in terms of culture, philosophy/values, architecture, demographics (age, gender, ethnicity, marriage status, etc), economy? In my opinion: no.

Also happens to be one of the most geographically distant cities to Europe.

European cities have buildings over 3 stories.

Shots fired (European cites don’t have shots fired)

Are you a lifelong resident? How did it compare to say 2000-2005?

I visited SF prior to 2005 and had a general impression it was very Bohemian with a strong underground scene. To some extent I consider the city today a capitalist parody of this former self, where you can stand in line at "Ramen Underground" and shop at the "Renegade Craft Fair".

> To some extent I consider the city today a capitalist parody of this former self

What do you think the people who lived there in the 60s say about your assessment of 2005 SF being "very Bohemian with a strong underground scene"?

Jerry Rubin as far back as his 1970 book "Do It!" criticized the capitalists co-opting his image of the counterculture (a "revolution" in toilet paper!). I do think there was another wave of interesting people in the 90's with the Cacophony Society and original Burners, and there are still radical "scenes" happening today, most of which I'm probably too old to know about. The main structural impediment is just that it's too expensive for the kind of casual under-employment that enables these scenes to thrive.

So to recap:

It's always worse than it was but people think it was still good when they got there but got much worse shortly thereafter.

No. Culture moves in waves. You hit the right part of the wave and it's a great ride. Time it just wrong and you wash out, but you might still have fun, especially if it's your first time out and you don't know what a good wave feels like. I don't agree with the sentiment that every time and place is equivalent to every other time and place, and that comparing them is a meaningless exercise in nostalgia, if that's what you're implying.

What year(s) did you live in SF or spend significant time there?

I'm curious if you want to make a substantive point, please go ahead and do so without waiting for my complete biographical details.

The timeline you've laid out:

Pre 2005 - "general impression it was very Bohemian with a strong underground scene" 2005-2010 - "the city had a very positive vibe" Post 2010 - "overcrowded, overvalued and overcapitalized" "a capitalist parody of this former self"

My guess is that you likely moved to SF around 2005 and the city fortunately managed to maintain its "very positive vibe." Yet someone who moved there in the mid 80s would likely have a very different opinion of the same era. Similarly some tech bro who moved there in 2010 would likely have a more rose-colored take on the 2010-2018 era.

I guess my substantive point is that people like to think they were there when it was good no matter when they were there.

I got that from your previous comment. I don't think it means the city is the same in 2018 as it was in 2005 or 1985. I'm talking about specific structural differences that don't have anything to do with when I got here (e.g rent).

No but it calls into question your assessment of the city.

I'm well aware of potential cognitive biases based on the arc of personal experience and I think I've accounted for that above. Meanwhile you've addressed zero of my objective points. You're a troll.

I have no idea what your objective points are. All you’ve said is, “the city used to be good now it isn’t.”

> we're the most European city in America

New York?

The fairly obvious difference with New York and European cities is the grid system. There's Canary Wharf in London that is a bit similar to NY, but Canary Wharf isn't really like the rest of London.

As a European who has been a few times to both NY and SF, SF seems a lot more European to me. But couldn't tell you why exactly. I guess SF is more relaxed in many ways and NY is way too intense (which I love, but it's not something one finds in Europe).

I don't know, I find SF very Californian - people are enthusiastic about everything, even if they aren't being genuine.

NY feels more real - as in London, Berlin or Paris, someone will tell you if something's shit. NY also obviously has a comparable arts scene. Apparently there's a SF Fashion Week but it's sure isn't in international calendars. People from NY seem to have travelled more than people from SF too.

Maybe SF is more like, say, one of the Spanish cities in terms of being relaxed?

Montreal?

When Americans say the singular "America" they mean USA.

That's probably true for Americans from the USA, not so sure about Americans from other American countries.

Context matters. You're essentially reading "my favorite football team is the Eagles" and responding "well Eagles are actually a type of bird".

My fellow Canadians routinely say "my friend moved to America" and similar.

Since everyone is chiming in on your "most European city in America" statement I figured I'd give it a go. The reason I love visiting Europe is for the cities as the variety of cultures offer a staggering number of varieties. I don't think anyone would say London and SF are similar, but maybe London and NYC.

I'd also like to throw New Orleans into the mix, and agree with Montreal as well even though it is in Canada. I'd really like to see Vancouver but have never been.

So in one way I think NYC because you can find cross sections of the cultures of many European cities there, but maybe SF more relaxed way of life is more similar to some. I however do not find the people of Lisbon where I am now (rapidly becoming a very multicultural center as more people move for the cheap prices and beautiful weather) to be quite so relaxed as the people of California (as awesome and friendly as they are), however I've only been to California a few times and never for any extended period of time and have only been in Lisbon a week and a half and NYC for ~5 years.

So I guess what I'm saying is... what do I know? I guess maybe Boston's another good city from the comments, beautiful, nicely paced, definitely didn't notice any feces or needles last time I was there.

Maybe it's P = NP problem. Some google searching places New Orleans at the top of 21 followed by Venice Beach, CA. Then there's a list of seven dominated by smaller cities (towns?) with the big one I've heard of being Kansas City. Never been there, would never have thought of it. I have however read about Peoria (sp?) Iowa which does indeed sound quite European. And of course Quebec City comes up which is a great choice.

It probably really depends (for both continents) where you've been, what you've done, when you've done it, and on and on.

So we get nowhere, eh?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com