Reflections on Atlanta article in Conde Nast I: Is it true that the Olympics 'backfired' on Atlanta? (Jackson: school, live)

[WilliamM]

Originally Posted by FromCLTtoATL

I have a couple of questions that might be easier to measure:

1. What did the Olympics do for city infrastructure?

2. Did the Olympics have an impact on residents (i.e., were some neighborhoods altered?)

3. Were the Olympics scattered around the city or concentrated?

Though I've been coming to Atlanta off and on all my life, the years just before and after the Olympics, I wasn't here.

I think by these measures, CtA, as a couple of earlier posts mentioned most are inclined to judge the Games positively, despite some questionable moves like the the 'cleansing' of the neighborhoods near the stadium (which might have eventually happened anyway even w/o the Olympics as this was a trend across the nation as a whole in the 90s - think Cabrini Green).

As far as those damned trinket stands go, something tells me there wasn't much nonsense like that to be seen in Beijing. Not having to bother with inconveniences like democracy can be quite a boon to event planning, I'd assume.

The real difficult thing to judge though -- which is prob part of the real motiviation for a city to undertake something like that -- is the overall boost to a city's image, in the PR sense. This one's tough to judge probably for the same reasons it's tough to make judgements about Atlanta as such (as this forum amply demonstrates!). By all accounts the media's focus on a few transportation snafus seems to have been wildly blown out of proportion and unfair. And the bombing of course didn't help. But it's so hard to say because the games really did put Atlanta on the map and give it a phenomenal promotional boost, and there's no way to know what it would have been like without it. It changed the city so much.

Great line about the Village being a 'blast', DeaconJ.

[DeaconJ]

Originally Posted by FromCLTtoATL

I have a couple of questions that might be easier to measure:

1. What did the Olympics do for city infrastructure?

2. Did the Olympics have an impact on residents (i.e., were some neighborhoods altered?)

3. Were the Olympics scattered around the city or concentrated?

Though I've been coming to Atlanta off and on all my life, the years just before and after the Olympics, I wasn't here.

1. There were some major infrastructure improvements associated with the Olympics - like extending Marta to North Springs and adding a few stations/replacing Techwood and other projects with new mixed-income residential/construction of Turner Field/etc. I think with the time constraints involved, many of the improvements were more cosmetic just to dress Atlanta up a little. But there were and still are a good number of infrastructure improvements.

2. Many of the city's housing projects were demolished or will be in the future (the few that remain) and the residents relocated...so I guess that is considered an impact on those neighborhoods, but a positive one IMO. The inner city neighborhoods seem to have benefited from a renewed interest in Downtown, but it's hard to say if all the residents of those neighborhoods see it that way. Many of the areas around Downtown definitely look a lot better than they did in 1990.

3. With a few exceptions, the majority of Olympic venues were located within the Olympic Ring (a circular area with a 3-mile radius surrounding Downtown).

-Soccer prelims were played in a handful of cities around the Southeast, with the final rounds being played in Athens. Athens also hosted a couple of other early round events like volleyball.

-The water competitions were held either in Savannah or on the Ocoee River or at Lake Lanier.

-The cycling, archery, and tennis venues were at Stone Mountain, and the beach volleyball was played in Jonesboro.

-Softball was at a newly constructed stadium in Columbus.

-Equestrian was at the horse park in Conyers. Shooting was in South Fulton.

So a handful of events were scattered, but they are mainly the ones that would have to be. No city would have an equestrian facility Downtown...or water sufficient for kayak/canoe and yachting. The university facilities located in the city helped a lot...Ga Tech, GSU, Morehouse, Clark Atlanta, Morris Brown all hosted events and either got new facilities or the existing ones got a facelift. The main venues (along with the university locations) were Turner Field, Atlanta-Fulton Co. Stadium, the Georgia Dome, the Omni, and GWCC. So...yes, the venues were concentrated in the Downtown/Midtown and Stone Mountain areas.

[DrGonzo33]

I was living in ATL during the Oylimpics. downtown you could not walk 10 feet without having someone try to sell you a bottle of water for $3 dollars, the MARTA was overloaded, had to wait 3 or 4 trains before you could get on one, lots of parts were cheesy and in bad taste, and over marketed, not to even mention the Centinal Park bombing

[WilliamM]

Originally Posted by DrGonzo33

I was living in ATL during the Oylimpics. downtown you could not walk 10 feet without having someone try to sell you a bottle of water for $3 dollars, the MARTA was overloaded, had to wait 3 or 4 trains before you could get on one, lots of parts were cheesy and in bad taste, and over marketed, not to even mention the Centinal Park bombing

Sure, I've heard some of this kind of thing (but much of that has been through the media and thus hard to know how to put in perspective). But all things considered, DrG, I'd have to say your opinion appears to be in the minority.

[blkgiraffe]

Originally Posted by WilliamM

Sure, I've heard some of this kind of thing (but much of that has been through the media and thus hard to know how to put in perspective). But all things considered, DrG, I'd have to say your opinion appears to be in the minority.

Doubt that, this is the normal review or opinion of how it was in ATL during the Olympics.

[johnatl]

^What a shock that you would take that stance. And just who considers this the normal view or opinion - Houston people?

If you weren't here to experience it for yourself, you have no idea. The media was merciless on us, particularly the foreign press.

Our Games are already bought and paid for. Ask someone in Montreal how they feel about this - they are STILL paying off their Olympic debt.

[WilliamM]

Originally Posted by jluke65780

Doubt that, this is the normal review or opinion of how it was in ATL during the Olympics.

Ok, maybe we can quibble about what the 'normal' view of the Atlanta Olympics is but I find that boring frankly.

I originally opened the thread to see if people had a view as to whether it was correct to conclude that the Olympics 'backfired' on Atlanta due to whatever factor: logistical glitches, lack of grandeur in comparison with other major world capitals (as we've seen since), or whatever. It kind of went without saying that there were some things that didn't go perfectly during the games, but at the same time, they also seem to have been largely successful, too, in other ways (thus raising the question maybe as to what the real motivation behind getting them here was, etc). I wasn't really asking whether you think the Olympics were a good experience or not per se, but I guess if you think that it goes without saying what your take is on the original question in the thread.

[johnatl]

^If you phrase it that way WilliamM, then I would say a hearty no.

I think there was a healthy dose of sour grapes that came through pretty clearly in the article. It was almost as if the author regurgitated the thoughts of the European Press.

[WilliamM]

Originally Posted by johnatl

^If you phrase it that way WilliamM, then I would say a hearty no.

I think there was a healthy dose of sour grapes that came through pretty clearly in the article. It was almost as if the author regurgitated the thoughts of the European Press.

Yeah, I know what you mean, johnatl, it really seems that way. Another possibility is that he's NY-based and is annoyed that NY got beaten to the punch by this little upstart Sunbelt city in the South. In fairness, he does sort of try to be measured in his condescension, but it's not really successful.

Btw, I guess what I was aiming for by asking this question was, to say the games backfired on Atlanta means you know what the criteria are that it should be judged by. But doesn't that presume you know what the motivation for having them was? I don't know that I have the answer to this, but the article seemed to be overreaching and that got me to thinking about it.

[AcidSnake]

Originally Posted by luckysnap

Atlanta is a Generic city, no real history(except for the Civil War, and that is swept under the rug),No Character, no real reason to visit, too much traffic, too much polution, too much pollen, too many racial issues, too much crime and too much sprawl.

You'd probably have to say that about a lot of cities in America. Blame Corporatism. It takes something natural and pristine and corrupts it into a mockery that has to make money in order to justify it's own existence. We are all tainted by this process, and that is what contributes to Atlanta's lack of character.