NYC as City State

Centuries ago in Europe, many parts of the continent were divided up not into countries but city states. Basically these were politically autonomous regions dominated by a single city that were, for all intensive purposes, countries. Many of these were in Italy: Venice was a city, Florence was a city, for example. There still a few in existence in the world, namely Singapore and Monte Carlo. 

What these city states lacked in land and population, they more than made up for in economic power. They were places where their wealth came not from plundering their natural resources but in unleashing their human ingenuity.

New York City is not, technically speaking, a city-state. Heck, we're not even a state in the United States of America! We're a town like any another in this country, at the mercy of a state and the federal government. But New York's economic and cultural power, plus our status as a city where anything and everything is possible, gives our city an international prestige that crosses all domestic and foreign boundaries. The image of New York as a distinct, amazing place makes it almost its own country.

When the terrorists hit us on 9/11, they chose NYC for a reason. It represented the zenith of American economic power -- and they wanted to damage it.

Obviously they failed. And in the decade since then, NYC has only continued to develop as its own kind of country. We see in our nation's government total dysfunction thanks to the corruption of big money, scorched earth politics, and ideology run amok. But in NYC, we have a government that is, for the most part, politically functionally, uncorrupted, and sane. And with an influx of population from around the world, more and more talent floods into our city every day, growing the city's prominence.

Our city is the world -- not just the nation's -- but the world's financial, fashion, publishing, theater, broadcasting, and legal capital. Plus we compete strongly in areas that seem to be the domain of other big cities, namely film and television as well as technology. With so much power, New York can't help but to be see almost as city state. And as the world become only more of a global village, cities matter more than ever -- and NYC, London, Paris, Tokyo, Rio, and others will matter as much if not more so than the countries they are contained in.

A few years ago, I blogged about this phenomenon of NYC as the "international city." Mostly what I write about here in the provincial lives most of us New Yorkers live, or about New York as an idea, a philosophy. But sometimes I look at NYC as a world leader, a city state of sorts. And I was ahead of my time! 

A huge article in The Atlantic this week looks at Mayor Bloomberg and NYC as a world leader, a country of its own, very much in the same vein of my blog post from almost three years ago. As the rate of global interdependence speeds up, it will matter as much who is the mayor of these world capitals as much as who is the leader of those nations. The leaders of these cities will wield enormous power not only over their cities but over the global community centered in them. Call it a power shift or a paradigm shift -- in globalization, cities matter now more than ever. In this new world, the city state is rising and NYC is, as always at the forefront of an important change.

International NYC Redux

A few years ago, my family and I visited China. Shortly after blogging about that trip, I blogged about the interconnected global village we all live. When you visit a KFC in the Beijing airport, you realize the world has indeed shrunk.

The world is big and small at the same time. Or flat, as others have called it. 

Living in NYC, you are acutely aware of living in the capital of the world. We are not just a great American city, we are not only an international city like London or Tokyo, we are the capital of the world because this is where the world comes together.

This is the home of Ellis Island and the United Nations. This is a city with whole neighborhoods defined by the nationalities that populate them (Little Italy, two Chinatowns, Koreans in Flushing, Greeks in Astoria, Russians in Brighton Beach, Orthodox Jews in Williamsburg, and on and on). This is where the Statue of Liberty sits, a symbol not only of our nation's liberty but a beacon to the world -- Lady Liberty, that Mother of Exiles, calling the poor, tired huddled masses from Ancient lands yearning to be free.

As much as I write about NYC on this blog, I also like to write about wherever I travel to in the USA and the world. So far I've traveled to, and blogged about, China, Venice, Paris, London, Portland, New Orleans, and Kansas City. I've also blogged about the various exhibits at the Met that have an international flavor. And the neighborhood I live in, Astoria, is not only the Greek capital of NYC but also the Egyptian capital of NYC -- and the Arab Spring has not only taken place in Cairo and Libya and Tunisia but also on Steinway Street. 

NYC is the world.

And learning more about the world is always fascinating. 

Increasing, like a lot of Americans, I've gotten sick of watching the TV news because so much of it is dumb and cynical. Also, American news poorly covers the world. But if you live in NYC (and have cable), you not only live in the capital of the world but the world can literally come into your living room. On our cable system, we have some of the best international cable channels available. Now a lot of them are in other languages but several of the best ones are in English. Specifically, CNN International, Al Jazeera English, Russian Today, and CCTV (the Chinese English service). Also, you can find BBC World News on most PBS stations. 

If you want to find these channels on your dial, go to the Time Warner website or flip around on the remote.


The quality of the reporting on these international stations is vastly superior to regular network and cable news. You learn so much about the world in which we live that you feel much smarter after watching it. And when you live in NYC, the capital of the world, it's great to have these international cable channels to compliment this international city. 

Classic Mr NYC

Ten years ago today I wrote one of my favorite blog posts -- Farewell to Funky Town.

It was the last day of the Bloomberg era, the end of a time of enormous change in the city. Mayor Bloomberg had taken office on January 1st, 2002, just months after 9/11, and the city was in full-recovery mode. By the end of his time in office, the look, feel, and life of the city had changed -- in many ways for the better -- but it had also become more expensive and difficult to live here, the city feeling more and more like any big international city around the world.

For the last ten years -- from December 31st, 2013 to December 31st, 2023 -- the city has been mostly the same as the Bloomberg era, except for the massive disruption and trauma of COVID.

In many ways, the last ten years can be divided into 2014-2020, and 2020 to 2024. COVID did something to the city's spirit, it enervated it, it seemed to bring up the decades of buried traumas of the past. Fear returned. Fears about crime, dislocation, seeing the city as failing. These fears are not in any ways borne out by reality -- NYC is booming more than ever. But these fears, exacerbated by the media and a new incompetent mayor, in this era of anti-progress, have had their impact. We haven't returned to "funky town", we've entered some new odd phase but I hope it ends soon -- and our city's great optimism returns.

New York: International City

During my recent trip to China we watched a lot of BBC World and CNN International in various hotel rooms. And it was in China where we learned about the awful terrorist bombings in Mumbai, India. Obviously this great tragedy made me very sad and brought back memories of 9/11 here in NYC.

It also got me thinking about the shrunken world in which we live. Here we were watching American and British TV in China and were learning about something that had happened in India. This was something unremarkable and routine in our day but, a century ago, would have been unimaginable. Globalization it's called, and it's here to stay.

And in this global culture, we have seen the rise of more and more "international cities" -- cities like magnets which attract people from around the world. These cities are political, business, and cultural capitals where millions of people come in pursuit of greatness. And for those of us, like New Yorkers, who are citizens of an international city, the rest of the world is literally outside our window and on our streets.

In centuries past there were only a tiny handful of international cities like London, Paris, Rome, Berlin and maybe Istanbul (once Constantinople). Most of these were capitals of the great empires, literally ruling the rest of the world. But today there are many such cities and they span nearly every continent and time zone. Cities like Sydney, Tokyo, Beijing, Moscow, Bangkok, Mumbai, and many others. They may not literally rule the globe anymore but, in many ways, their grasps are greater than ever. These cities excite the imagination and fire up ambition. Almost everyone wants to be a part of them.

Even terrorists. Obviously what has happened in New York and Mumbai, as well as in London and Madrid in recent years, shows that international cities have been and will forever be targets. Clearly, it's important never to forget this.

However, we must never live in fear. Fearful is what terrorists want us to be. We defeat them by our optimism, by our energy and ambition, by our just getting up in the morning and continuing to lives our lives and build our societies. Those of us who live in the international cities of the world, while always being cognizant of its dangers, should be thankful and grateful that we get to live in such a place and should never forget what a blessing it is to have the rest of the world at our feet.

I know I will.

NYC & Venice: Sisters Forever

Some of you may be familiar with the so-called Sister Cities concept, the idea that certain cities share enough qualities to make them sibling-like entities. This movement began, like so many global initiatives, after World War II, and is run by a group called Sister Cities International. It might not come as a surprise to you that NYC's main sister cities are, among others, London, Beijing, Cairo and Madrid, big international cities all, that set the world's socioeconomic and political agendas.

Makes sense. But I have a different take: if NYC has a real bosom-like sister city, then it can only be one place -- Venice.

Dig this. 

Right now I'm reading (and also watching the Netflix show) about Marco Polo, the famous 13th century adventurer. In 1271, at the age of 17, he traveled from his hometown of Venice deep into the wild world of the Mongol Empire. This was the largest land empire in history to that point, swallowing up all of Mongolia and China and much of what became the Russian Empire (and later the Soviet Union, etc.). Marco spent two decades in service to the empire's great ruler, Kublai Khan. Marco's duties took him all over China, Mongolia, and Asia, including modern day Indonesia and Japan. He was one of the world's first global citizens and his book Travels set imaginations ablaze of distant worlds to be discovered (this book became Christopher Columbus' inspiration and personal bible). Without Marco Polo, history would have unfolded very differently.

And why did Marco hike across Asia, the so-called Silk Road, and into history? What motivated him? 

Money. Business. Trade. Marco came from a family of merchants in a city of merchants (The Merchant of Venice anyone?). 

Unlike other great cities, Venice was not founded primarily as a political or military capital: it was founded for commerce. It's primary raison d'etre was economic, financial, and commercial, not domination and power. It was literally built on water to facilitate the export and import of goods. Traders from around the world could easily land in and depart from this archipelago of trade. And from Venice, Marco Polo found a new world.

Sound familiar? Remind you of someplace else?

Unlike other big international cities, NYC is not a political capital (only temporarily more than two hundred years ago). NYC is and always has been a city of business. A city of commerce, not power. A city more interested in productivity, not ruling. 

And what made NYC the New World's business capital? Same thing as Venice -- water. 

Without the vast harbor, New York would never have become a business leader and America's economic engine. Even today, in this age of airplanes and the Internet, the harbor is one of the city's greatest economic asset. Cargo and cruise ships, and all sorts of commercial vessels, come and ago every day, a whole other city floating off the waterfront. 

   

And NYC is also not only a place for business but a point of entry and a point of departure: for centuries, into the current day, people come to America through NYC and then out into the rest of the country, the Wild West, to discover their futures and fortunes. Manifest Destiny, and so on.

And so I think it's fair to conclude that NYC and Venice have more in common, are more sibling-like, than any other two cities in the world. They are cities of islands, business built on water, beloved by their inhabitants, visited by millions every year, that people come to and sometimes leave to discover the wider world, motivated by the adventurous spirit of these cities. 

They are also, not surprisingly, cities of culture (think of the Met and the Tintorettos), cities of great architecture (think of the Empire State Building and the Doge Palace), cities of lust (think of old school Times Square and Venetian Seduction masks), and cities of diversity (think Chinatown and the Jewish Ghetto). They are cities built upon imagination, yearning, ambition, personal accomplishment -- and, ultimately, hope for a better world.  

So without NYC and Venice, without the drive and determination of their people and the people they've inspired, without creating a culture where human initiative is its primary purpose, the world would be a different, lesser place. These two great cities fit each other perfectly. 

Sisters Forever. 

And I'm sure Venetian Marco Polo would have loved NYC. 

P.S. Here's all my Venice related blog posts from years past. As you can see, it's a city that's always captured this New Yorker's imagination and interest.

  

Corporate City Redux

Last year I blogged about how NYC is increasingly becoming a corporate city -- a city ruled by and for the very rich. Of course, NYC has always been a "corporate city" since it has long been the capital for corporate America, with many great national and international businesses headquartered here. But there used to be a division between the corporate world in NYC and how the city government was actually run. 

The corporate/private enterprise world didn't control our government, didn't have power over our land-use, our public schools, even our parks. 

But now it does: charter schools are replacing public schools, parks are being run less by the parks department and more by private foundations -- and the city is turning over huge swaths of our public lands to corporations. 

Look at this week's New York magazine for proof. There are two huge articles -- one a huge new super-expensive luxury apartment building (that is primarily for people who don't even really live in NYC) and another on Hudson Yards which will be the biggest, most expensive private development in our city's history. 

This is radical. And totally out of character with NYC's history. 

It's very depressing and scary to think about how this wonderful, great city -- a place where "our poor huddled masses" used to come in search of a better life is being turned into a place where only the rich are welcomed and can survive. It's still a great city, still great place to live but, if we continue down the road of the corporate city, will we still be so?

Remembering WNYC-TV

New York City has changed in many ways during my lifetime, much of it in the physical infrastructure of the city itself: old buildings torn down and new shiny ones put up, neighborhoods gentrified from poor to rich, pedestrian plazas and new parks, bike lanes -- you name it, this town has transformed dramatically since the turn of this century. If a time-traveller from thirty years ago was to stroll the city streets today, he or she would be like Marty McFly in Back to the Future II, looking in wonder at how the old town had become techy and neon.

And they'd also discover that the city's old public TV station, WNYC-TV, is no longer around. 

Today we live in the age of the Internet, streaming shows, and literally thousands of cable channels. We drown in content from all over the world. But it wasn't always like this. Once upon a time, and not so long ago, television was three and a half-networks, local stations, and a bunch of cable channels showing repeats, old movies, and news. Here in NYC any "alternative" programming was reserved for public television stations like Channel 13 which, then and now, mostly showed documentaries, British TV, and children's shows.

WNYC-TV was different.

Owned by the city, a sister broadcaster to WNYC radio (which is bigger and more popular than ever today), and located on Channel 3, WNYC-TV was a bizarre hodgepodge of programming. It was a cross between PBS and public access, a true oddity. WNYC-TV would show local public affairs shows, coverage of the United Nations General Assembly, foreign news from Japan and Italy, soccer games, and music videos.

Like the city itself, the station had a gritty, street-level vibe but also an international flavor. It was intensely local and extremely global. 

It also showed a lot of very weird and off-beat British TV, the kind of stuff you didn't see on Masterpiece Theater.  During the week, the station would show episodes of the working class British soap opera EastEnders. Very popular in the UK (and still on), the show basically consisted of lots of cocky-accented people yelling at each other in pubs and dreary houses. On Saturday nights, there was The Diary of Adrian Mole, about an English teenager dealing with the miseries of his home life and school (being a teenager at the time, I identified with him except that he had a cute girlfriend named Pandora and, uh ... well, anyway). There was The Fall and Rise of Reginal Perrin, about a food company executive who hated his life so much that in basically every scene he was trying to kill himself, only to get interrupted. There was The Young Ones, an extremely raunchy show about a bunch of university pals living together in a messy house. And there was Shelley, about an overeducated and unemployed man living in London, spending the entire time making fun of people who are more sucessful than him. It's also where I discovered Blackadder!

These shows were like nothing else on regular American TV at the time, and they did quite a number on my impressionable teenage mind. I felt lucky to live in a city where we had a station like this.

And then I went to college. And WNYC-TV vanished. 

In 1996, the city sold off WNYC-TV and radio. A foundation was started to buy and run the radio station, and today it's a broadcasting and podcasting powerhouse. But WNYC-TV was sold off to some commercial broadcaster who just leased out its airwaves. Any trace or connection to the city was gone. All that is left of WNYC-TV are various clips on YouTube, some of which you can see below, including the final signoff in 1996.

This is a part of the city that is gone today but whose spirit still lives on. 

They like us ... they really like us

Here's some rare good news: last year was a record for tourism in NYC.

48.7 million people visited our fair city in 2010, up 7 percent from 45.5 million in 2009.

It's a clear sign of economic recovery when more and more people start to travel and, when a big international city like ours gets more visitors than ever, things must be looking up. Of course it also helps that the dollar is still pretty weak compared to many international currencies so it's cheaper for foreigners to come here. Even if it makes traveling for us Americans less desirable, whatever pours more cash in NYC's economy is always welcome.

Let's just hope we reach the city's goal of 50 million visitors in 2011. I can't think of a better way to show that the city is back, ten years after 9/11.  

Mayors Abroad

Currently Mayor Adams is in Israel to visit the nation's leaders -- and help cement support from Jewish voters in his expected reelection effort in 2025. 

As this article explicates, mayors have been visiting foreign lands with large diasporas (i.e. voting blocks) in NYC for a long time. Back in the day, it used to be the three Is -- Ireland, Italy and Israel. This coincided with the immense power that the New York Archdiocese used to wield in the city, with mayors or candidates for mayor sucking up to the Cardinal in St. Patrick's of the day. But as the city's demography as changed, and as the Catholic church has gone into sharp reputational and temporal decline, this obeisance from mayors has declined with it.

In recent years, mayors have been visiting Puerto Rico and the Dominican Republic as well, places which also are strongly represented in NYC's population and politics. Increasingly, it would not surprise me to see mayors going east -- especially to  China and Korea and India -- since the Asian population is sharply on the rise and more and more Asians are exercising their political clout in the city.

When you're the Mayor of NYC, the world's greatest international city, you don't just need to mind the five boroughs -- but also huge swaths of the globe.

Five Years of Mr NYC

Oh my, oh my, oh my, oh my, oh my ...

They said we couldn't do it. They said it wasn't possible. They said we would never make it this long. (Actually, there is no "they" or "we" and no one ever said anything but it sounds good to pretend that somehow the odds were against you and you overcame, "fought the power" and what not.).

Anyway, today marks the fifth anniversary of Mr NYC. 

Yes, exactly five years ago today -- Tuesday, March 27, 2007 -- this blog emerged into the world. Five years ago today this little cyber body spawned out of the great big bang that is the Internet. Five years ago today my neurosis took the form of Mr NYC and the world has never been the same since.

Can you believe? Better believe it now.  

For half a decade, yours truly has been (hopefully) entertaining you, my faithful audience, with my thoughts and feelings about this, the greatest city in human creation, along with various other tidbits and info. So much has happened in the years since this blog started that it seems more like a whole decade and not just half of one. 

Five years!

I've done over 1300 posts that has covered the history, culture, news, infrastructure, and lots of stuff you never knew about NYC. I've done interviews and reviews. I've shared some of the aspects of my travels and life (while maintaining my precious anonymity) and I've looked at how NYC relates to individuals and the world. I even became a dad.


Just run a search of this blog and you won't believe all the stuff you'll find. 

And thanks, most of all, to you my readers. You've kept this blog going. We're closing in on getting almost 100,00 hits which is pretty amazing considering that this is a non-commercial blog that doesn't advertise, doesn't promote itself, just basically hangs around online and hopes people find it.  

Thanks to all the people in the USA, UK, Germany, Russia, Canada, the Netherlands, France, the Ukraine, China, Brazil, Australia, Indonesia, Norway, Chile, the Philippines, and all the other countries of the world who have checked out this blog (I think we even had someone from South Africa leave a comment once). 

Thanks for making Mr NYC international! An international blog for an international city!


So here's to five great years. Hopefully you've enjoyed the ride.


More to come.

I'm big in Russia

Well, sorta.

Since I don't make (hardly) any money off this blog, I almost never look at my stats to see how many page hits/views/whatever I'm getting. Frankly, I always assume that virtually no one reads this blog but I adore every person who does and am grateful for any and all comments I get (well, most ...).

So color me surprised when I checked out my stats yesterday. Shockingly, Mr NYC gets between 150 and 200 page views a day. That really amazed me since I thought it would be more like two. Even more surprising to me is that, after the USA, the country where this blog is most read is Russia. Comrades! Close on Russia's heels were the United Kingdom and Germany (I have one lovely reader from Germany who comments every so often and it's always nice to hear from her). Other countries on the most read list are Japan (my condolences) followed somewhat distantly by Canada, Denmark, France and China. 

Once I got a comment by a reader in South Africa. That was cool. 

So I guess you (okay, me) could call this an international blog for an international city.  And of course we have lots of readers here in the USA. 

Greetings to all my readers from across the fruited plane, around the world, and all the ships at sea!

And if you are an active reader to Mr NYC, 1) thank you, thank you, thank you, and 2) I'd love to know where you live (not your address or anything creepy like that, just your city/state or country). You can just hit the comment link on this post and drop it in. I'm sure your fellow readers would like to know too. Share and share alike. Thanks! 

Knowing Me ... Knowing Brooklyn ...

"Dere’s no guy livin’ dat knows Brooklyn t’roo an’ t’roo, because it’d take a guy a lifetime just to find his way aroun’ duh goddam town." -- Thomas Wolfe, Only The Dead Know Brooklyn 

     

Brooklyn has always been a special place. In the greatest city in the world, Brooklyn has an identity all its own -- the New York within New York. Brooklyn obnoxiously "does its own thing" in a city where doing your own thing and being obnoxious reigns supreme. Brooklyn is an odd place, too. Consider ... 

How many places can claim to have been a city? Then a borough? Then a Brand?

How many places have produced both Supreme Courst Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Jay Z?

 How many places in NYC can claim to have a park that's even better than Central Park?

  

If New York City was a rock group, Manhattan would be the lead singer and Brooklyn would be the lead guitarist with mystique -- Manhattan is Mick, Brooklyn is Keith (everybody likes and respects Mick but everybody just loves "Keef"). I guess, taking this scenario to its logical conclusion, the Bronx would bass, Staten Island would be keyboards, and Queens would be the drummer.

 What is it about Brooklyn then that makes it so special? It's hard to say. It's something ineffable, elusive but ... it's there ...   

Perhaps, because, if you aren't a hardboiled native like Wolfe's character, then you can become one. Brooklyn invites all. It's a land of immigrants -- whether it is young hipsters coming in from around the country (think Girls) or foreigners coming to America (think ... uh ... I'll get back to you on that). 

For me, Brooklyn is personal. Both of my maternal grandparents were from Brooklyn, children of immigrants. My grandfather was born in the City of Brooklyn in 1895 and was part of the Brooklyn regiment in WWI. Who I am, for better or worse, it because of Brooklyn. To know me, you need to know the history of Brooklyn and what it means, not just to NYC, but to America and the world.

But that was then. Brooklyn used to be a refuge for the tired, poor, huddled masses earning to be free, the wretched refuse cast upon the teeming shore of the New World. Now it's a place for million dollar glass highrise condos. Lots and lots of condos. 

Of course, Brooklyn is more now than just a place to live -- it's a lifestyle. Heck, Brooklyn has gone international! Go to Europe today and stores and stuff there are all being labeled "Brooklyn" this or that in order to show their "cred." Brooklyn is beyond cool. It's practically redefining the planet.

And yet ... as the glass condos rise ever higher into the Brooklyn sky, taking real estate prices with them, and as the immigrants and hipsters to pour in, making it ever more diverse and cool -- that old world Brooklyn, the "Brooklyn before the Brand", still exists. It exists underground, in the many graveyards of the borough, where the Brooklynites of lore sleep in their eternal rest: Leonard Bernstein, Horace Greeley, FAO Schwartz, John Matthews "the Soda Fountain King", and many others (including my grandparents). There they lie ... gone but never forgotten.

So to know Brooklyn is to know it's people -- past and present. Only then will we know its future. 

The Silly Season

Every four years this country goes through the misery of a presidential election. The only good thing about them is that they usually produce some very interesting books (The Making of the President, The Boys on the Bus, Game Change, etc.), giving us naifs the behind the scenes drama of the campaigns and putting them into some kind of social/historical context.

There are still two months to go until the primaries, and four months until the general election, but I certainly hope that some ambitious journalist will produce a book about the 2013 NYC elections -- 'cause they're wild!

In a way, it was always destined to be so.
 

In 2005, virtually every incumbent was re-elected. In 2009, there were low-key elections for comptroller and public advocate but the public paid them very little attention and, of course (thanks to the outrageous term-limits change), the mayor and virtually every other city office holder was re-elected.

This year, however, the mayor and most other incumbents are term-limited so it has set-off a mad dash for the various public offices that govern NYC. We are poised to elect a new mayor, new public advocate, new comptroller, new borough presidents for Staten Island, Manhattan, Brooklyn and Queens, as well as a chunk of the city council. And it has invited a new slew of candidates, including some very controversial ones.

 

But more on that later.

 

First, the mayor's race.  Both the Democrats and Republicans are having some brutal primaries and it's very unclear who will win either.

 

Republican Mayoral Primary

 

This race is between Joe Lohta (former MTA chairman, former Deputy Mayor under Rudy), John Catsimatidis (a.k.a Johnny C., owner of the Griestedes supermarket chain), and George McDonald, founder of the Doe Fund. McDonald is pretty much a non-entity in this race but the contest between Lohta and Johnny C. is intense. Lohta has the resume and institutional support (Rudy backs him, most Republicans in NYC back him) but Johnny has money -- lots of it -- and he's already running TV commercials. Plus he can argue that his business background makes him more like Bloomberg than the others.

This primary is reminiscent of the 1989 Republican primary that pitted Rudy vs. billionaire Ronald Lauder. Rudy had just left his job as US Attorney and had almost 100% Republican establishment support. However, Lauder spent $11 million in the primary and made it competitive. Rudy still beat Lauder but, many believe, the primary hobbled Rudy in the general election against Dinkins. Rudy had no significant primary in 1993 when he finally won the mayoralty.

 

The big question mark over the 2013 Republican primary is: will Johnny C.'s money overwhelm Lohta establishment support? Most Republican primary voters will probably vote for Lohta since they know he's Rudy's guy. But Johnny C.'s money gives him the advantage of doing an early, full-court press on these voters and it might help him with them. Also, McDonald could prove to be a spoiler. Some Republican primary voters might not want to vote for Lohta since, as head of the MTA, he oversaw toll increases. But they might not know or trust Johnny C. So McDonald might do better than expected and even force a run-off. This primary is almost impossible to predict but it will result in the first Republican candidate for mayor in more than two decades whose last name isn't either Giuliani or Bloomberg. And either he will follow in their footsteps or fail.

 

Democratic Mayoral Primary

 

This primary is, on the other hand, a zoo.

As usual, the other city-wide elected officials, the Comptroller (John Liu), the Public Advocate (Bill De Blasio) and the City Council Speaker (Christine Quinn) are running as well as the former Comptroller (Bill Thompson) who came within 4% points of beating Bloomberg in 2009. There are also a few minor candidates: a former city councilman who's been out of office for more than ten years, plus a church pastor and a comedian. But, of course, this primary was shaken up recently by the entry of Anthony Weiner, the former congressman who was forced to resign two years ago for Tweeting naughty pictures of himself.

For a while, Christine Quinn was easily leading the primary field in the polls but then a few things happened: Weiner entered the race and, shockingly, vaulted to the top of the polls; then Bill Thompson gained unexpected support in endorsements and money. Meanwhile, the anti-Christine Quinn forces have run TV ads against her, and her poll numbers have fallen badly. So, for the moment, Quinn and Weiner are tied in the polls with Thompson in third place. De Blasio is doing his best to gain more support but, so far, hasn't. John Liu would probably have been a leading player but, a few months ago, his campaign treasurer and one of his former fundraisers were both convicted of fraud so his candidacy has gone nowhere.

 

Because there are so many candidates, the primary field seems very fluid -- anyone of them could rise or fall quickly. At the moment, I would put my money on Quinn going into a run-off against either Thompson or Weiner. If it's Thompson, I think he will win the run-off since the people who hate Quinn really hate her and Thompson would be an acceptable alternative. But if she ends up in a run-off against Weiner, then she will probably end up winning because of Mr. Weiner's scandal. This will be especially interesting to watch.

 

Comptroller

 

Until recently, this was a sleepy race. The Manhattan Borough President Scott Stringer was the only Democratic candidate and it looked like he would avoid a primary. But then, just days ago, the hooker-loving former Governor Elliot Spitzer jumped into the race and suddenly an election that wasn't even getting any attention in NYC was getting international coverage. And now Spitzer is leading in the polls!

 

There's also a Republican candidate named John Burnett (who's also black!) so this race has suddenly gone from sleepy to wide awake.

 

Public Advocate

 

This is the probably the least exciting of the big time elections in NYC. This race is refreshingly scandal free, and all of the candidates are certainly qualified for this job that requires so few qualifications.

 

There are four major candidates in the Democratic primary: State Senator Dan Squadron, Councilwoman Tish James, former Deputy Public Advocate Resha Saujani and a college professor named Cathy Guerriero.  Squadron is a young guy who has been in the state senate for four years and seems like the hyper-ambitious type who probably views this job as stepping stone to the mayoralty and beyond (I'm sure he has dreams of being president, he seems like that type). Tish James is from Brooklyn and used to actually work for Elliot Spitzer when he was Attorney General. Saujani is best known for her disastrous congressional run in 2010 and for her work in the PA's office under De Blasio -- as well as for her connections to Wall Street and the tech sector. Ms. Geurriero is the only totally fresh political newcomer; in addition to teaching, she successfully coordinated former Pope Benedict's trip to NYC in 2008.

 

There hasn't been much polling in this race, although I saw one where Ms. James and Ms. Geurriero were effectively tied. As a black woman with high name recognition in Brooklyn, James is probably getting a lot of support from minority and Brooklyn voters. Ms. Geurriero's last name has apparently garnered her support from white ethnics in the outer boroughs. So, at the moment, it looks like it's a race between these two ladies but I'd put my money on Tish James, since she's getting all of the establishment support and has the strongest qualifications.

 

Borough Presidents

 

There are competitive races in each borough except for the Bronx, where Ruben Diaz Jr. is up for reelection. As usual, each of the races in Queens, the Bronx, Brooklyn and Staten Island has tons of candidates. Whichever candidates are lucky enough to win the coveted New York Times endorsements will probably win their primaries and general elections (i.e. whoever wins the Manhattan, Queens, and Brooklyn Democratic primaries will win the general and whoever wins the Staten Island Republican primary will win the general -- although a New York Times endorsement will probably mean very little in that race).

 

Don't know much else about these elections. Don't much care either, since the borough presidents have virtually no power.

 

City Council

 

There are fifty-one races. In about forty-five of them, whoever wins the Democratic primaries will win the general elections and, in two of them, whoever wins the Republican primaries will win the general elections. There are about four competitive races -- both in primaries and/or general elections -- out in Queens but I don't know much about them and can't, at the moment, find much info to share.  

 

Mr NYC's Analysis

 

As indicated numerous times above, the polls in these various races are unclear and anything can happen. But, to me at least, looking at the dynamics and potential dynamics of this election, a few things are becoming clearer.

 

In the mayor's race, the Republican candidate will be either Lohta or Johnny C. While neither is as formidable or rich as either Giuliani or Bloomberg were, they are both potentially very strong candidates who could appeal to the Giuliani/Bloomberg coalition that has kept Democrats out of the mayor's office for twenty years. Lohta can claim to have been part of the 1990s turnaround of NYC. Johnny C. can claim to be an unbought, skilled manager like Bloomberg. Both candidates have committed gaffes recently (Lohta compared Port Authority cops to mall cops; Johnny C. compared taxing rich people to the Holocaust); also, as first time candidates, either might wilt under the spotlight of a general election. But, assuming neither doesn't, either one is well positioned to keep the mayor's job away from a Democrat.

 

Right now, it looks like the Democratic mayoral candidate will be either Quinn, Thompson or Weiner -- unless De Blasio or Liu suddenly surges. Either Quinn or Thompson would be strong in a general election: they are respected, have solid records in public service, and are progressive but acceptable to the business community. Should De Blasio suddenly do well, he could be strong in a general election as well.

 

Weiner, on the other, is detested by just about everyone except for a core of the Democratic primary electorate. He may have enough support to get into a run-off but it's difficult to imagine him winning it.

 

Gaming out various general elections scenarios is hard but certain scenarios seem clear.

 

Quinn or Thompson could probably defeat either Lohta or Johnny C. in a general election. Without an incumbent mayor running, Democrats have a natural home field advantage. Also, unlike 1993 (with high crime) or 2001 (with the recent horror of 9/11), at the moment it doesn't look like this election will be taking place in an atmosphere of crises  -- unless another crises suddenly emerges like it did twelve years ago. No crises and no incumbent means that most Democratic voters will probably gravitate towards the Democratic candidate. Crime and terrorism are no longer the urgent problems they were, but the cost of living and a declining middle class are -- and this makes the climate more favorable for the Democratic candidate.  

 

But ... if Weiner were somehow to emerge as the Democratic candidate in the general election ... then it's very possible that we will have our third Republican mayor in row. It seems impossible to me that a majority of New Yorkers will vote for this guy. While NYC is a Democratic town, NYC voters have become comfortable voting for non-crazy Republicans for mayor. And if Democrats end up nominating a toxic candidate like Weiner, either Mr. Lohta or Johnny C. can win.

 

Liu's problems make him basically unelectable, either in the primary or general election, but at the moment it looks unlikely that he'll even make it into a primary runoff.

 

This "toxic" problem extends to the comptroller's race as well. I recently saw a disturbing poll that put Spitzer ahead of Scott Stringer in the Democratic primary. If Spitzer gets through the primary, then the Democrats will have nominated for city-wide office an admitted whore-monger who was forced to resign his job as governor in disgrace. Suddenly, the Republican candidate might become a whole lot stronger in the general election. Voters will say "Spitzer? Ew! I might vote actually vote for the Republican."  Usually the winner of the Democratic primary wins the general election easily -- and this will happen with Stringer -- but if it's Spitzer ... then NYC might have a second competitive city-wide general election and might have it's first non-Democratic comptroller in 70 years.

 

You can be excused for shooting yourself in the foot once, but not twice.

 

Imagine: two disgraced former politicians at the top of the city-wide Democratic ticket. If this happens, I predict that the general election will be a disaster -- and the opportunity our city has to finally have a real progressive mayor in decades will be shamefully and inexcusably lost.

And it'll go deeper than just losing the mayoral and comptroller's race. NYC voters will think, rightfully, that Democrats have lost their minds and may start voting Republican in the competitive city council races and even for public advocate (I don't know who the Republican public advocate candidate is -- or if there even is one -- but who knows?). The trickle-down effect of nominating these guys could be horrible.

Then, in 2014, instead of finally having a mayor who cares about the middle class, we will have another plutocrat mayor -- plus a plutocrat ally in the comptroller's office -- who will do everything in their power to cater to the rich, hurt working people, cripple unions, allow "developers" to destroy neighborhoods, and continue with the economic regression that has been plaguing this town for decades.

The stakes for this election are incredible high. This is a "hinge of history" election where either our city will start address its social and economic problems -- or let them get worse. 

To be continued.

Hizzoner-Elect in His Own Words

This may be one of the best victory speeches I've ever heard, not only in NYC politics, but ever:

 

And since NYC is the greatest city in the world, the ultimate international city, the world took note:

Us Morningside Heights kids gotta goin' on! 

Mr NYC in France, Holland & England

Memory is tricky. Some things we remember as clearly as a blue cloudless sky. Other things we remember only faintly or not at all. It doesn't matter how long ago or recently these events were -- we remember what we want to, for whatever reason, no matter how long ago. 

I think the memories that fade are those that can't be easily catagorized as "good" or "bad." We remember our traumas and our triumphs but rarely the things in between. 

As our movements in the outside world have been limited by the pandemic, as I've clocked more time at home than ever before, I've spent a lot of time thinking about trips I've taken in the past. Most of them I've blogged about here already but then, quite recently, my memory was jogged about a trip I had taken the summer befor my freshman year of high school. It was a five week student trip to France, Holland and England. For whatever reasons, I honestly hadn't thought about or remembered even going on this trip for years and years and years.

Until now.

I guess I didn't really remember this trip because I didn't like most of the other kids on this trip and there was lots of teenage nonesense (who wants to remember that?). And yet, as I thought about the trip again recently, I realized I didn't remember any of the other kids on it -- but I remember what I saw.

And what I saw was amazing.

First, France. We landed in an airport in Basel, Switzerland and took a bus across the French border to a small town called Argentierre. It was a small, picturesque country town. We stayed in a hostel up on a hill, with a stunning view of the Alps. We would then walk down into the town to get food and change money but we spent most of our time hiking the Alps and beholding the amazing vistas. After a few days we took an overnight train to Paris, emerging into the city in the early morning (in fact both of my trips to Paris, nearly 20 years apart, have involved my arrival by train). We stayed in an old fashioned stone building on a beautiful street with a courtyard, and we walked streets and over the bridges of this stunning city every day. One night we even ate in a Chinese restaurant. We visited the Louvre and, yes, saw the Mona Lisa; we visited the bizarre-looking Centre Pompidou (a modern art museum that is a piece of modern art itself), we walked through the Luxumbourg Gardens and strolled around at night, the city truly living up to its reputation as the city of lights.

Second, Holland. We took a train to, if I remember correctly, the Hague but we didn't see any of the international courts of justice. Instead, we got on bicycles and biked for several days around the most hilly parts of this otherwise very flat country. This was the roughest part of the trip for me -- by far. The bikes were big and metal and I had neither the size nor stamina for long stretches of biking (at one point we even biked past some royal palace behind a big gate). At the end of each day, at the various hostels we'd stop at, I would collapse from exhaustion (we did, however, spend one afternoon during our biking adventures at a topless beach -- that was interesting!). At one point, as we were biking, I had a really nasty fall and the skin from part of my left knee was dug out, exposing a vein. It took a long time to heal and I still have a scar to this day. Fortunately, we soon ended the biking portion of the journey and headed to Amsterdam. I love this town. Highly walkable, gorgeous canals, lovely and simple architecture. We went to all of the big museums (I don't remember all of them, sadly), and, of course, we saw Anne Frank's house which was moving, sad, and inspiring. And, yes, we strolled around the notorious Red Light District although obvious we didn't patronize it. Nor did we go into any of the pot cafes. However, I did go into some of the McDonalds and, not for the nothing, I laughed the loudest when the movie Pulp Fiction came out and the Vincent Vega character talked about Royales with Cheese and people in Amsterdam soaking french fries with mayonaise. I saw all that with my own eyes, a couple of years before Mr. Quentin Tarantino did!

Third, England. We took a boat to get there, a boat from Belgium. I don't remember where in Belgium we left from or where in England we landed at. But on the day we landed we took a boat to Cambridge and stayed at the university. Our home was called Sidney Sussex College (British universities are made up of a number of "colleges"), whose most famous alumni (in real life) is Oliver Cromwell and (fictional) is Sherlock Holmes. Again, memories of this time was scarce, but I remember we ate in these huge neo-classical dining halls and we rowed down the River Cam in punts which is a huge tradition there. Next we headed north to the beautiful Lake District where we spent days backpacking around the stunning hills and dales around the lakes, mist everywhere. We also visited Rydle Mount, the modest but gorgeous home of the poet William Wordsworth whose family still owns it to this day. Then we headed down to London and stayed at the University of London, a massive and rather dreary modern-y place. I've been to London several times since then and I honestly don't remember much about this particular visit except that we spent a lot of time hanging out in the city's parks -- including the infamous Speaker's Corner in Hyde Park where, on Sundays, people stand and kvetch about whatever's on their mind. One guy I saw spent his time shouting "I'm perfect! I'm perfect!"

After that, we came back to NYC.

And that's it. That's all I remember. But these vague memories of that trip, a long time ago, has inspired me to go back to France, Holland and England as soon as possible -- and to enjoy it properly this time!

Interview: Elena Soterakis, NYC Environmental Artist

In this multi-media world, where ubiquitous screens blare at us at every second, it’s easy to overlook more traditional media like painting. It’s easy to think that such “media” is irrelevant to our fast-paced, interconnected, digital universe, and that paintings exist solely as objects of beauty or curiosities.

But the work of Elena Soterakis proves that painting can be totally relevant to our changing world. Starting as painter of landscapes and cityscapes, Elena’s work now focuses on the theme of environmental degradation -- a subject more relevant to our modern world than probably any other. Using classical painting techniques, along with a keen eye and brilliant imagination, her paintings capture both the ironic beauty and abject horror of what humanity is doing to its own home.

Elena was kind enough to tell Mr NYC a little bit about her background, her work, and her thoughts about art, environmentalism and NYC.

Tell us a little about your background and what made you want to become a painter.

I’ve always really wanted to be an artist. I can’t imagine being anything else. I’ve known this since the sixth grade, the years when you have to make dioramas and posters to go with every report. I loved doing poster board projects for my science class, and I realized through those that I loved making art. Those projects honestly inspired me more than my middle school art classes, which were very structured and unexciting. I actually got poor grades in art class, because they wanted me to do boring projects like draw my shoe. They weren’t engaging at all. It was really thanks to my science teacher, Fran Casola, that I got so interested in art. I remember at the end of the year, she told me I really deserved a B in science, but my dioramas were so good that she gave me an A.

Who are some of your favorite artists and influences?

I’m a diehard Anslem Keifer fan. He’s a contemporary German artist. His paintings are very textured. I love the surfaces of his paintings; they’re chunky and interesting. I love the way he paints! It’s funny, because my paintings really don’t look like his. I wish I painted like he did! When I was young I really loved Edward Hopper. He was one of the artists that really made me want to be a landscape painter. Recently I’ve been inspired by the Hudson River School; I quote a lot of their paintings in my own work and turn them into degraded 21st century landscapes. Much of your early work was of landscapes and cityscapes.

What attracted you to this kind of painting and what were some of your favorite places to paint?

I’m always inspired when I’m driving, or walking down the street, and I see an empty landscape or cityscape that’s devoid of people, but has the remnants of people. I did a residency in Ithaca at the Constance Saltonstall Foundation for the Arts, and I loved painting there. The residency is on a 400-acre estate, and I painted on site. That was very exciting for me. But I also really like industrial, gritty landscapes, and Brooklyn is great for that. More recently you've been doing paintings about environmental degradation and preservation.

What inspired you to move your work into this direction and do you consider your art as a kind of activism?

I wanted to make landscapes that reflect the 21st century. I feel like in this day and age of climate crisis, painting romantic nature scenes would do nature a disservice. I wanted to be a part of a dialogue. My work questions how environmental preservation can take place in a “throw away” society. I see my art as a call to action, and I do see it as a form of activism.

What are some of your favorite environmental paintings that you've done?

I did a triptych, called “Lake George Revisited”, in which I quoted a painting from the Hudson River painter, Martin Johnson Heade. The original Lake George painting was completed in the 1860’s, and I turned it into three different 21st century scenes of degradation. I like it because it’s a startling juxtaposition to see such beautiful nature next to human waste.

Tell us about the NARS Foundation and how you're involved with it.

The NARS foundation is a non-profit organization located in Sunset Park which occupies two floors of an industrial building. I have a permanent studio there, but it’s also home to an international residency program in which artists rotate in and out every three to six months. We also have two galleries in the building, and we hold open studios twice a year, in the fall and spring. It’s a very dynamic community to be a part of with a diverse group of artists coming and going. That community has tremendously benefited my art.

You're based in Brooklyn and are active in the arts scene in NYC. How do you think gentrification affected the art world in this city? Has it made it better or worse?

Without a doubt, gentrification has hurt creative communities across New York City, and not just visual artists. It makes having a studio very difficult - real estate is expensive. It creates a pressure cooker situation, in which rents are increasing so much that you eventually have to move. I was renting a studio in Industry City, but rent increased too much and I had to leave. There are hardly any visual artists there anymore, and big stores like ABC Home & Carpet have moved in. It’s difficult to maintain community ties when artists are being shuffled around the city.

Does NYC inspire (or still inspire) or work?

Absolutely! I’m very affected by my surroundings. Any sort of garbage or detritus is interesting to me. I'm always fascinated to see what people are throwing out. The New York cityscape definitely inspires my color palette. And it’s a vibrant city - I’m very inspired by all the art created here.

Tell us about your upcoming show in Houston and anything else you'd like to promote.

I have an opening on August 3, in Houston with my artist friend Emily Dingmann called “Observance of Form”. The idea for this show started last spring, when Emily was curating a group show called “Come Together”, and she invited me to come down to Houston to make art with her for the show. It was so interesting and fun to collaborate together that we decided to keep the dialogue going, and it eventually turned into this 30-piece show. I’ve been travelling back and forth from Brooklyn to Houston to work on this series with her. We have very different artistic styles - Emily is an abstract minimalist painter, and I’m more of a representational artist who works with different mediums like collage. It was really interesting to fuse our styles and see what we came up with. It really broke me out of my comfort zone and introduced me to new materials and processes. The same night, I have an opening at the NARS Foundation for a show called, “Practice: In Progress” which is a group show of 22 artists curated by Elisa Gutierrez, who recently came to NARS from Mexico City.

Finally, what advice would you give to aspiring artists?

The most important career advice, I would say, is to build a community of like minded artists who are supportive, thoughtful, and kind. Once I developed a community, things got a lot more exciting and my career started to gain momentum. Also, see a lot of art. Good art, bad art, see as much as possible so you can develop your taste, and have an understanding of your likes and dislikes.

Thanks Elena! You can see an example of Elena’s other work on the front cover of my book Leaving New York.