The backlash begins: Why being designated an "It City" is no honor (Portland: appointed)

[BirdieBelle]

If you can get through the unwieldy hyphenated modifers, this New Republic article skewers the trend of glorifying trendy cities like ... Nashville.

Does Portland's fate await us??

Take This Microbrew and Shove It | New Republic

[groovamos]

Well I have to admit I found the article entertaining and deserving of a few chuckles. But what about the psychology of it all? There has to be something about your home city that starts to work on you at about the age of 18 or so. That's how old I was when my dad announced that he had taken a job in Park Ridge, IL and when my family moved later in in the summer. And it couldn't have happened at a worse time for the 18 year old, among other things like a poster store (Pembroke) and a head shop on 21st (name escapes me), there was more importantly a Baskin-Robbins which had just opened near the confluence of highways 70 and 100. I was sure Nashville had just entered super-progressive period, a high end national phenomenon like Baskin-Robbins proved it.

So what the article seemed to indicate is that Nashville has harnessed this boosterism/civic pride and funneled it into high creativity and high energy, to a level noticeable to people from other regions, a Baskin-Robbins just won't cut it for this crowd. But you know what else? I always was aware of the unique terrain of your region, knew that it would be a huge asset when the city matured, and based on what people are now saying about Nashville, I was correct. Radio talk show host M_____ B_____ visited there for the first time a few months ago and was just raving on air about the visual appeal of the city and environs.

[nashvols]

Well that article wasn't pretentious or anything.

I do think there are some very valid concerns with being an "it" city. Particularly that you'll get overplayed by the media, and develop a reputation for being over-hyped or overrated. You'll have one side, the ignorant masses, that will flock here because publications like the times told them to. Some will force themselves to enjoy it, because they believe they should. Others will be disappointed, because this will turn out not to be the fantasy land so marvelously painted by the "in" media crowd. And you'll have still others -- people who have either lived here or visited in the past that will say "see, I've been coming here all along!" or "I knew this place was great" followed still by others who will say "I remember Nashville when it was truly cool, before all of the ignorant mouth-breathers and wannabe hipster minions took it over."

But in the end, this press coverage, as ingratiating as it may be, is far better than the alternative, in my opinion. The reputation of being a dangerous, unfriendly, not-happening place is far more damaging. Even the old Hee Haw-boots-and-cowboy-hat stereotypes can take their toll...both at keeping people away (and business), and being a nuisance to locals trying to explain that they don't ride tractors to work, shop at a general store, use an outhouse, or whatever to some dimwitted ignorant outsider.

The cost of being cool isn't lost on me, but if at the very least it shakes up our stereotypical image, then it may turn out to be a positive thing.


And the New Republic can stick it.

[Beat02]

Great article. hah

[Spikett]

Originally Posted by nashvols

Well that article wasn't pretentious or anything.

I do think there are some very valid concerns with being an "it" city. Particularly that you'll get overplayed by the media, and develop a reputation for being over-hyped or overrated. You'll have one side, the ignorant masses, that will flock here because publications like the times told them to. Some will force themselves to enjoy it, because they believe they should. Others will be disappointed, because this will turn out not to be the fantasy land so marvelously painted by the "in" media crowd. And you'll have still others -- people who have either lived here or visited in the past that will say "see, I've been coming here all along!" or "I knew this place was great" followed still by others who will say "I remember Nashville when it was truly cool, before all of the ignorant mouth-breathers and wannabe hipster minions took it over."

But in the end, this press coverage, as ingratiating as it may be, is far better than the alternative, in my opinion. The reputation of being a dangerous, unfriendly, not-happening place is far more damaging. Even the old Hee Haw-boots-and-cowboy-hat stereotypes can take their toll...both at keeping people away (and business), and being a nuisance to locals trying to explain that they don't ride tractors to work, shop at a general store, use an outhouse, or whatever to some dimwitted ignorant outsider.

The cost of being cool isn't lost on me, but if at the very least it shakes up our stereotypical image, then it may turn out to be a positive thing.


And the New Republic can stick it.

Maybe he's jealous. Or, more likely, trying to prove how cool and hip he is to not be into "it" cities.

I agree with you that positive press is better than the alternative. I'm also glad to see so many of the older buildings being used for something new instead of being torn down. Remember when they wanted to tear down the Ryman, back after the move to Opryland? As a kid I spent many a Saturday night backstage at the Ryman. That area has a warm place in my heart. And the Second Ave warehouses are wonderful. I remember back in the early 90s when there was a rock club and some (to me) cool off-beat shops in those old buildings and I used to go down there regularly. I still prefer that kind of thing to the tourist mecca the area has become, but I realize it's good for the city and, to be honest, I'm not much for doing that kind of thing anymore (getting old, I guess) so I'm not there anyway. And I hope that people who are drawn to visi Nashville because of these things will discover how much more there is to the city and surrounding area. If they don't have time to see it all on their first trip, maybe they'll come back again.

What the article doesn't say, but what I think is true, is that all cities are in their own way unique. They have their own history, character, etc. Nashville isn't Portland, Austin isn't Sacramento. They may all have brewpubs, but that doesn't make them twins (and there's nothing wrong with brewpubs. I love good beer. )