The Village Voice is No More

The last couple of weeks have been a parade of notable deaths -- Senator John McCain, Aretha Franklin, Robin Leach, and now the Village Voice.

Okay, so the Village Voice wasn't an actual person but, as a newspaper, it was a vibrant, living entity that covered the life of NYC in all its gory glory. It also colored the life of NYC, literally, the free weekly newspaper that any New Yorker could access in its trademark red and blue news boxes. It was part of the "New York alloy" (as Pete Hamill would call it), part of our city's spirit and psyche, and now, after 63 years, it's vanished.

The Village Voice was so many things -- investigative reporting, gossip, arts and culture coverage,  opinion, classified ads (including naughty ones), and lots and lots of info (want to find where the next poetry reading will be or where the newest indie movie was playing? -- the Village Voice would tell you). Obviously the Internet wrecked havoc on much of the Voice's raison d'etre (newspapers like the Voice were the Internet in many ways back in the day) but it had built lively website that was as good a news source as any. And now that's gone too.

What I'll miss most, what will be lost and never replaced, are the incredible writers who came from the Voice -- Wayne Barrett, Tom Robbins, Nat Hentoff, Micheal Musto, and countless others. Since the announcement of its closure, many of its former writers who went onto big careers have been waxing nostalgic about their time there, about how it made them into professional journalists and writers, and how the Voice's end is not only the end of a singular newspaper but the end of the kind of places where great writing can be cultivated. There's no web site, no app, nothing, that can replaced that. And that's the biggest loss of all.

NYC has always been, always prided itself, on being hive of opportunity, a place where people could come to discover and cultivate their talents. With the closure of the Village Voice, a distinct NYC resource like that made it only harder for such new voices to thrive, and it betrays, in its small way, what this city is supposed to be all about.  

Farewell Village Voice. You'll always be part of my NYC spirit. 

The Nostalgia Heap

So the "big" news in NYC this week is that the Village Voice, that sixty-plus year old free weekly newspaper, will no longer put out a print edition. Like most publications these days, it'll be online only. 

To me, the newsworthiness of this story isn't that the Village Voice is going online only -- but that it took so long. The destruction of print publications has been happening for the better part of a decade now. Still, NYC will look a little bit different as the blue and white voice of progressive values vanishes from our streets and transfers to our "devices." 

Call it a sign of the times -- or a victim thereof. 

This change in the Village Voice is triggering the predictable nostalgia articles for the "good old days" by people who used to work there. As I've mentioned before, nostalgia is all the rage these dark Trumpian days, particularly in NYC.

To sling further items onto this nostalgia heap, it's worth remembering that this year marks the 40th anniversary of the opening of Studio 54, the hottest nightclub in history, the club that defined the disco era and the beautiful sleaze of the 1970s. It was the club everyone wanted to go to and that nobody could get into. It's the club that spawned movies and documentaries and a whole culture of chic. Predictably, the people who "remember it when" are writing about Studio 54 with affection and sadness. The most amazing thing about the Studio 54 era is how short it was -- roughly from the Spring of 1977 to early 1980 (when its owners got busted for tax evasion and went to jail). The club has become legendary -- probably because the Studio 54 era was so short lived that it never got old and lame. 


But the reality is that Studio 54's reign was probably destined to be brief, no matter how tricky the tax returns of its owners were. By 1980, Ronald Reagan was marching towards the White House, the economy was stuck in stagflation, American hostages were languishing in Iran, and the original cast of "Saturday Night Live" was departing. The mood of the country was changing, the culture getting more conservative. Even by 1980, Studio 54 seemed like an embarrassing relic of an embarrasing era. Like a great show that's been on the air one too many seasons, it probably would have suffered a backlash at some point. 


But once something is cancelled, once it goes away, the fond memories begin. The memories pile up -- thus, the nostalgia heap.  

Ah, nostalgia. I get it. Again, I'm as nostalgic as the most nostalgic person there is. But to my brothers and sisters in the nostalgia business, I plead to you: stop it. All of these articles, all of these "memories" ultimately just lead to depression. They don't do you or your readers any good. They make us  sad about the present and scared for the future, and risk giving us false feelings about a past that probably wasn't so great to begin with. "But," these nostalgia mongers might argue, "just look at the maniac in the White House -- can you blame us? Wasn't the past better?"
 
Maybe. 

Who cares? The future is here and always will be.  We're not going to make our futures better by crowing about how great the past was. NYC isn't going back -- and shouldn't. Let not us not remained trapped in a museum of memories. Let's go into the future and keep the nostalgia pile to a minimum. 

The Village Voice Lives!

Two years ago The Village Voice went out of business, a depressingly familiar victim of technological change and indifferent nouveau ownership. Since its demise, the website has been publishing old articles from its massive print and digital archives, a living memory of NYC's past.

Now The Voice has been sold again, this time to a guy who owns a bunch of small news sites, and plans to relaunch not only the news site but also publish quarterly print issues -- and, down the road, even a podcast.

What kind of Voice will arise from its ashes remains to be seen -- a lot of these smaller city newspapers that turned into news sites have become vanity projects for its owners, vehicles for their business and political interests, not worth reading. What's clear is that the new owners thinks of The Voice as a powerful NYC brand and wants to extend it so hopefully it will become a worthy successor/continuation of the old newspaper, a real voice of downtown and offbeat NYC.

Welcome back! 

So Long Guys

Today is a very sad day in the annals of New York journalism: after more than thirty years, the Village Voice will no longer be publishing the brilliant work of Wayne Barrett and Tom Robbins. Thanks to budgetary reasons and the Voice's inept ownership, Barrett was let go at the end of the December and Robbins, in an act of solidarity, left with him.

Wayne Barrett is, without question, the best journalist working in this town today. He has done more to rip the scabs off the powerful in this city and state that he should have earned multiple Pulitzer Prizes over the years. Tom Robbins has done similarly excellent work. They are classic shoe leather reporters -- digging up documents, interviewing people, following the money -- journalism at its best. 

Barrett and Robbins did what all reporters should do but few these days do: speak truth to power, afflict the comfortable and comfort the afflicted. Theirs is indeed a rare breed these days. Too many "journalists" in this town today aren't really journalists at all but thumb sucking opinion writers. "Journalists" like the vile, repulsive Michael Goodwin spend all their time propagandizing for politicians and policies that help the wealthy and powerful while attacking any public figure or policies that dare help anyone making less than $100 K a year. Pricks like Goodwin don't have the balls (or the heart) to engage in real journalism -- they just act as stenographers for entrenched interests. Real journalists investigate what the entrenched interests do to regular people -- and how they get away with it.    

Whether it was his annual list of the city's worst landlords, how Ed Koch basically sold this city to real estate developers, investigating how Rudy Giuliani utterly failed to prepare this city for a massive terrorist attack, how George Pataki is the real culprit for our totally inept state government, or how the Bloomberg administration was complicit in the Duetsch Bank building fire -- they covered the stories most newspapers in this town shied away from.  

They had no holy cows: they went after Republicans and Democrats, unions and corporations, you name it. As this article states, they were good old-fashioned muckrakers  -- they would have made Upton Sinclair proud. 

You should read Wayne Barrett's final Voice column -- it's a hoot. He'll be working at the Nation Institute and hopefully Tom Robbins will land somewhere. But it won't just be the same without these guys at the Village Voice. Our city has lost another small part of its identity. 

We'll Take the Village

Newsflash: the city is changing ... Okay, that's not really news but sometimes it's interesting to see -- literally -- how it's changed.

That's why I love this Village Voice slideshow of Greenwich Village over the years. It's spans from the 1950s to today, and shows the fascinating people and places of that most mythic of neighborhoods of lower Manhattan. You'll see the famous and the not-so-famous and, most of all, you'll look at history as it happened.

Talking about the Village Voice, as it ceases print publication, the iconic red newspaper box that you could find on the street, and pick up an issue for free from, will soon be gone. This slideshow of the red box around town will make you sigh. 

Interview: Michael Musto of "La Dolce Musto"

Cindy Adams, Liz Smith, Rush & Molloy -- and Michael Musto. He's one of the legends of the New York gossip and culture scene -- an iconic voice and authority of all things "downtown" -- and if he ain't written about it, it ain't happened.

Michael's been writing his Village Voice column "La Dolce Musto" for more than two decades. He's appeared on PBS, NPR, E! Entertainment Television, and MSNBC (amongst many other media outlets), and although he's got a national presence, Michael's never strays from his New York state of mind.

Michael was kind enough to share a few thoughts with Mr NYC readers about gossip, New York City, and bloggers.

How long have you lived in NYC and been writing "La Dolce Musto"?

I've lived in New York my entire life. I couldn't exist anwhere else. I don't drive and I'm allergic to too much sun--or at least to people who stay out in too much sun. I've been writing the column for at least 20 years. My first column was in hieroglyphics, ba dum pum.

What made you, an Ivy League graduate, want to become a gossip writer?

Even at Columbia, I mainly cared about gossiping about my dormmates and buzzing about Cher's latest hairstyles (in between studying The Iliad, of course), so it all made sense to me. Gossip is what I do best. It deflects attention from myself and onto others who live in a faster lane while at the same time, ironically enough, getting me some attention as well.

Tell us briefly about the art of gossip writing. What makes one a good gossip writer? Who influenced you?

Gossip writing should be fair (there are two sides to every story), yet a bit jaundiced, so your eyebrow is always raised in response to the p.r. hype machine. It should also be carried on with an underlying sense that none of this stuff really matters much--not in the larger picture--yet it's all important because we care about it passionately and guilty pleasures should not be ignored. A gossip writing style should be bold, personal, individual, and opinionated. Through the years, I've been influenced by Tom Wolfe, Rex Reed, Truman Capote, Liz Smith, Cindy Adams, and many others.

What are your favorite "gossipy" things to cover?

A walking train wreck like a Lindsay/Britney/Paris is fun to cover because their entire careers seem to consist of providing great tabloid copy. Plus I like what they do careerwise--Lindsay's a terrific movie star, Britney puts out really fun music, and Paris has a certain poise, even with egg on her face. She's telegenic and in fact so seemingly blank you can project whatever you want onto her and put her in any medium you like.

Who are your favorite people to cover? What makes a person good gossip fodder?

I'll cover anyone on the way up or the way down. These are the people who are desperate for press, so the'll say anything to get into your column. Once they're on top, they're generally too guarded by p.r. watchdogs to say anything interesting. I also like anyone who will provide conflict and good copy. "I hate my costar" is much more interesting than "My newest sequel was a labor of love."

What was your biggest scoop or most exciting thing you covered?

I was the first to run the details of the murder of drug dealer Angel Melendez by club kid king Michael Alig and his roommate Freeze. It was truly grisly, from the Drano injection to the smothering by pillow. I also was ahead of the curve on outing people like Rosie and Ellen, who weren't thrilled, but who ultimately came out with a vengeance and left me behind to out others. It was exciting to push buttons and go where no one was going at the time. Huge magazine profiles of Rosie were portraying her as an ambiguous single mom with a crush on Tom Cruise!

Did you really coin the term "Celebutard?" Please give us a brief definition.

I said the word on Countdown with Keith Olbermann and it somehow went into my Wikipedia profile as having been coined by me. I'll take credit, if they want to give it, but I can't say for sure if I coined it. On other sites, I've been credited with everything from being a martial arts expert to having written a movie starring Jayne Mansfield, so don't believe everything you read (except my column).

In many ways gossip columnists were the original bloggers. Are blogs and bloggers a threat to gossip columnists?

I feel like my column was the original blog. It consists of my wicked, personal thoughts and opinions interspersed (one hopes) with information and insight. The advent of actual blogs has been threatening to columnists, but I feel it's a welcome burst of energy that forces us to work harder and dig deeper to compete. And at least we get paid for it!

What do you love about NYC? How has the city changed in the years you've lived here?

New York has lost much "edge"--God, I hate that word--ever since Giuliani made it a giant Disneyland for tourists and rich people, but I feel those who fled in horror are complete wusses. I stayed and continue to find fringey nightlife and wacky people living on the precipice. I'd rather celebrate them than give up and move to San Diego just because you get a terrace there.

Is NYC still a great place for gossip?

Yes, it's great. L.A. has more celebrities per square mile--you can't even go into a 7/11 without running into a Pamela Lee--but here we have theater, movies, music, nightlife, everything, and it's all on a somewhat higher level.

Tell us something about Michael Musto we don't know.

He's actually a nice guy. Now THAT'S shocking!

Thanks Michael!

Check out La Dolce Musto every week in the Village Voice.

Interview: Rachel Kramer Bussel, "The Lusty Lady"

She's funny, smart, sexy and a helluva good writer - this quadruple threat is New York's own Lusty Lady, Rachel Kramer Bussel. A former sex columnist for the Village Voice, Rachel is probably the best-known authority on New York's naughty scene. She not only writes prolifically on everyone's favorite hobby, but she also interviews creative people and hosts readings series for new writers to present their work. Best of all, she shares Mr NYC's deep abiding passion for cupcakes. Rachel was kind enough to answer some of Mr NYC's questions.

1. How did you come to be a sex writer in NYC and is it as glamorous as on "Sex and the City"?

Well, I can definitely say my life is nowhere near as glamorous as Sex and the City, and that’s perfectly fine with me. Not only don’t I get to lounge around like Carrie, but I am nowhere near as wealthy as her.

I moved to New York in 1996 to go to NYU Law School. I was 20 and really thought that’s where my interests lay, but I didn’t know much about the day-to-day of being a lawyer, and once I figured that out, I wasn’t too impressed. I wound up quitting and working various temp/day jobs for a few years, freelancing here and there reviewing books or writing essays. I got asked to work on a few projects and slowly built up my writing resume, and then in March 2004 took a full-time job as Senior Editor at Penthouse Variations, then in October 2004 started writing the Lusty Lady column for The Village Voice. Along the way I also began editing erotica anthologies and by the end of next year will have more than 20 of them!

2. While always a fun subject, how do you keep writing about sex without it getting repetitive or (perish the thought) boring?

I would say that for me writing about sex doesn’t get boring because sex (so far) hasn’t been boring. I think if you’re only writing about the mechanics of sex, the in and out, so to speak, that can get old quickly, but there are so many nuances and I think everyone approaches it differently. By that I mean both how they conduct their sex and dating life and what they want out of sex, how they prioritize it, what turns them on. I’m such a voyeur and I love hearing about what other people are up to.

I really like the fact that, while I am not an expert in any way, I’m someone that my friends can talk to about things they might not have anyone else to ask. I was at dinner with a friend the other day and she looked around and then lowered her head and whispered, “I was told I have to ask you about this. Have you heard of this thing called ‘squirting?’” Her boyfriend wanted her to squirt (female ejaculate) and she was freaked out by it and we discussed it and I assured her that it wasn’t weird but also wasn’t mandatory. Then I sent her a copy of my friend Violet Blue’s book The Smart Girl’s Guide to the G-Spot.

I think sex, as a topic or an act, can get boring, but there are so many ways we can make it interesting that so far I haven’t run out of things to say. But another way I keep it interesting for me is to write about other topics, like books and pop culture and events, so that when I go back to writing about sex, I’m not rolling my eyes.

3. Tell us about your "In the Flesh Reading Series" and your love of cupcakes.

I started In The Flesh in October 2005, and it got off to a kind of rocky start. We had pretty small crowds, but the good thing about Happy Ending Lounge (well, one of them!) is that even small crowds fill up the cozy bar well. Then a few months in things took a turn and we’ve been pretty packed. Basically, each month I have erotica writers come and read their steamiest work. I also sometimes do special nights, like True Sex Confessions Night (that’s coming up November 15th, but first we’ve got Virgin Night on October 18th, featuring first-time readers and authors). It’s sexy, but there’s always humor. I love looking at the crowd and seeing them laugh or hang on an author’s words.

It’s really made me appreciate that writing doesn’t just happen on the page. Having to read my work in front of people month after month also makes me notice things in my stories I wouldn’t have otherwise, both good and bad. It makes writing a little more social for me than it would be otherwise. Oh, and because I’m secretly a total Jewish mother, I like to feed people, so I always give out candy and mini cupcakes and brownies. I just think that’s a fun little extra and people seem to enjoy it.

As for cupcakes, well, they’ve just sort of taken over my life. I started my blog Cupcakes Take the Cake in December 2004, and the interest in cupcakes has only risen since. Pretty much, they’re everywhere, and a New York State Assemblyman has even introduced a bill to make them the official New York State children’s snack and keep them from being banned! They are just so fun and I adore seeing what creative ways people have come up with to decorate them. There are bakeries sprouting up all over and I really love that I’ve become this cupcake authority and can rattle off the names of bakeries all over the country (and even internationally). What’s funny is that I don’t eat cupcakes all that often, maybe once or twice a month, and am not much of a baker myself - I leave that to my fellow cupcake blogger Allison. But finding out as much as I can about the world of cupcakes is something I’m happy to do. I look at photos of cupcakes every single day and by now can’t imagine my life without the blog.

4. What other things do you like writing about and what are your aspirations for the future?

I write about whatever catches my eye, really. I’ve interviewed dozens of authors, performers, artists, and other creative, interesting people, for Gothamist.com, Memoirville.com, and other sites. I cover the publishing industry for Mediabistro, where I get to interview editors and literary agents, and it’s really fun because I get to bond with other book nerds. I also interview bakery owners and fellow cupcake fans on Cupcakes Take the Cake and I love that because for so many of these people, their bakery is their first business and they’re so excited, and learning about their cupcake innovations and plans is fascinating. Someday I’d love to do a cupcake tour of the country and visit these people I’ve only corresponded with.

The future…I don’t really know what the future holds. I definitely want to continue editing erotica books and writing longer work, and eventually a non-fiction book about sexual politics. I’d love to do some talking head spots on TV. But mostly I look forward to being a mom in the next…let’s say five years. I don’t have a plan yet on how that’s going to happen, but I’m working on it. I’d ideally like to be making a living writing from home and taking care of my kids.

5. How do people react when you tell them you're a sex writer and how has it affected your personal life?

I think it depends on the person. For the most part, people are intrigued and want to know more about my career path, but in a respectful way. Sometimes I just say I’m a “writer” because I don’t want to get into a whole big discussion about it that could be potentially awkward. I think how I come across in person and the explicit nature of a lot of my writing is a bit at odds; I don’t tend to talk about sex or my personal life, and sometimes am the one shushing my friends for doing so. One friend of mine jokingly calls me a prude cause he always manages to make me blush!

There have definitely been people I’ve dated who were freaked out by the fact that I write about my personal life, but it’s not the type of situation where the minute I get home from a date or am done having sex, I’m racing to my laptop. For me, it’s more the people and situations that linger on my mind that make me want to write about them because they’ve had an impact on me that goes beyond the moment.

The people who I really connect with the most in my personal life are the ones who get that as much of a workaholic as I can be, I have a lot more going on that just being some girl with naked pictures of herself on the Internet. The phrase “sex writer,” when said in a judgmental way, is an easy and lazy way to categorize me. I can be a vamp and an exhibitionist, but I’m not in this for the sensationalism, and I’ve learned to let go of the people who only want to see that side.

6. Tell us what you love about NYC and does the city make you a better writer?

Wow. What don’t I love about NYC? (L train delays.) I really feel like this is my home and always will be. I love the energy and the people and the fact that there is just so much going on here. There’s always something new to discover, and I love that in a given month I can play trivia, eat cupcakes with strangers, go to comedy shows, work out, and whatever else comes along. You can never get bored in this city and I’m constantly discovering new scenes and things to do. In the past year, I’ve become friends with a whole bunch of comics artists like Dan Goldman, Molly Crabapple, Nikki Cook, and I love that even though I don’t have an artistic bone in my body, they’ve welcomed me wholeheartedly into their crowd and I get to explore this new world and learn all about it. I love having such a creative group of friends, so I can go to a bookstore and see their work up on the shelves.

The city definitely makes me a better writer because there’s so much to look at and absorb. I go to one party and meet someone who sparks an idea that sets me off. Walking across the Williamsburg Bridge, which I don’t do often enough, is often the catalyst for all kinds of ideas. That’s my little oasis from the noise and stress of the city.

Thanks Rachel!

Make sure to check out Rachel's website and Lusty Lady blog.

"La Dolce Musto" Forever

In the very first year of this blog, back in 2007, I had the honor of interviewing legendary Village Voice gossip columnist Michael Musto. He gave me a funny, quirky interview, and I was very grateful for his time. The name of his long-running column was "La Dolce Musto."

Now, if you'd like, you can go back and read about Michael's memory of his first 1984 "La Dolce Musto" column in the Village Voice. 

Michael is an Only in NYC type, the kind whose likes we might never see again. 

Interview: Ross Barkan of the Village Voice and the Guardian

Politics in NYC is a complex world. Few report about it so well as Ross Barkan, columnist for the Village Voice and Guardian. Ross is that rare thing in political reporting these days -- a thoughtful, impartial, and honest voice. As NYC gears up for its own elections this fall, Ross was kind enough to give Mr NYC readers his insights about the state of New York politics and the future of this city. You can follow Ross Barkan on Twitter at https://twitter.com/RossBarkan.

Crime and affordability have been the Big Issues in previous NYC elections but this year doesn't seem to have one defining issue. What do you think will be the main issues in this fall's campaign?

Crime is so low right now, but I imagine Nicole Malliotakis, the Republican nominee, and Bo Dietl, the Trump-like independent, will try to make it an issue. To me, that's silly. There are actual problems facing this city. Housing is extremely unaffordable, which has fed our homelessness crisis. Our subway infrastructure is coming apart. Unfortunately, the city has so little say when it comes to transit--the MTA is state-run and effectively controlled by Governor Cuomo--but the mayoral candidates certainly have a right to debate fixes. I hope they do. Housing and transit should be at the forefront of the race. Will they actually be? We'll find out. I hope we stop talking about statues. 

During his first term, Mayor De Blasio was not overwhelming popular and yet he won big in the primary and is favored to win a second term. Does this show the power of "holding your base" in politics or because, despite what the polls show, New Yorkers think he's actually done a good job?

It's an interesting question. De Blasio's 2013 primary win was more dominating than people understand, and helps explain some of his arrogance. In a crowded field of big-time contenders--Christine Quinn initially dominated media coverage, followed by Anthony Weiner--de Blasio was able to hit 40 percent and avoid a runoff, something no one thought was possible before that race began. He won almost every assembly district in the city. He won every borough. He built a coalition of liberal whites, Latinos, and blacks that isn't seen often in city politics. As mayor, he has never had a sky-high approval rating (Bloomberg and Giuliani went north of 70%) or a disastrously low one (Bloomberg sat in the 30's at one point). He's not a major personality, he has an awful relationship with the media, and he doesn't inspire visceral devotion or loyalty. But he has a core following, particularly in nonwhite outer borough neighborhoods. He is the first mayor in two decades to explicitly make it his mission to care about people who are poor and disenfranchised. Does he do enough to help them? It's fair to say he can do much more, but he's tried. Is he too beholden to real estate developers? Sure. Did some of the corruption investigations, even if they didn't lead to indictments, say something about an administration that prioritizes big donor access? Yes. De Blasio also has serious accomplishments as mayor--the universal pre-K program in particular--which voters can respect. He's been blessed with a good economy and a low-crime environment. He's definitely someone who benefits from the way our politics are set up, where Democratic primaries are everything, because his core base of support is so far unshakable. I'm not convinced, however, he couldn't win an election overwhelmingly if turnout increased or we held (as we should) nonpartisan elections open to all voters.

What effect, if any, will the Trump presidency have on this election? Does a President Trump hurt the Republican candidate by motivating Democratic voters or does he actually help her by motivating Republican voters?

Donald Trump is not good for Republicans in New York City. There are a lot of Republicans with intriguing ideas who deserve to be heard, like J.C. Polanco, the Republican candidate for public advocate. But Trump is extremely unpopular in the city and is toxic for the Republican Party here. Malliotakis has a challenge--on one hand, she's worried about losing core Republican support by disavowing Trump because he does have many fans in her home borough, Staten Island. On the other hand, her chances of even coming close to winning are zero if she's successfully branded as a "Trump Republican." (In her defense, she backed Marco Rubio pretty strongly in the primary.) Malliotakis' cause is rather hopeless, truth be told. Joe Lhota got 24% against de Blasio in 2013. Malliotakis can improve on that margin. How much, though, is unclear. This is another argument for nonpartisan elections or a "jungle" primary, where candidates of all parties run together and the top 2 face off in November. Malliotakis, a real conservative on many issues, represents viewpoints that aren't held by a lot of people in the city. 

Assuming all the incumbents are re-elected, who will be the leading candidates for mayor in 2021?

2021 is so far away, and I've learned many times over not to make firm predictions about politics. But you do have a field, at least, that is already coalescing. Comptroller Scott Stringer, who hungers for the office like few others, will run. Brooklyn Borough President Eric Adams has said he'll run. Bronx Borough President Ruben Diaz Jr. will probably run. Public Advocate Letitia James may run. You could see the next speaker of the City Council take a shot at it, or even outgoing Speaker Melissa Mark-Viverito, if she's so inclined. There will probably be other Democrats. Maybe Congressman Hakeem Jeffries. Maybe someone we can't even imagine.

Finally, what do you think most of the media and public are missing or don't fully understand about this year's NYC election?

In terms of issues, I wish there was more focus on public housing. Were NYCHA a standalone city, it would be among the largest in America. In terms of the election, what is the public and media missing or doesn't understand? Maybe that 2017 is a return to normalcy for city politics. You had 20 years of Republican mayors, which meant competitive general elections and primaries where Democrats fought among themselves for the opportunity to take down the Republicans. NYC is a Democratic town and we'll probably look back at that 20 year period as an anomaly. You also had crises that drove Democratic incumbents from office (Abe Beame, David Dinkins.) We're in a period of relative stability. De Blasio, the incumbent, is on firm footing. I don't think it means a decline in civic life if you don't get a feisty 2017 primary and general election. Ed Koch glided through two Democratic primaries and the Republican Party was so dead n 1981 it gave him its ballot line. No one remembers Robert Wagner's first re-election. There's a reason for that. 

Thanks Ross!

Wayne Barret Rules

As Mike Blooomberg runs (more like advertises) for a cynically and expensively acquired third term, most of the New York City press is accepting his victory as a fait accompli and doing absolutely no investigative reporting either into the man or his record

Some of this is due to the dying newspaper business. Some of this is due to the cynicism and ennui that has enveloped modern political culture. But most of this due to the fact that Mike Bloomberg is so rich and powerful that reporters in this town dare not cross him for fear of being "frozen out" or "blackballed" by his rich and powerful allies.

Except for Wayne Barret. He is fearless. This legendary reporter is the only honest voice in New York City politics today, who dares to do what reporters use to do: afflict the comfortable and comfort the afflicted. Dig deep and find the facts. Speak truth to power.

He explodes the myth that Mike Bloomberg is just an honest and selfless public servant, using his millions to deliver nobless oblige to the masses.

Do you know that someone who worked for disgraced ex-Illinois Governor Rob Blagojevich works for him?
Do you know how he's weakened the teacher's unions?
Do you know how he's handled (or not) Ground Zero and how it lead to deaths in the Deutsche Bank building fire?
Do you know about his alliance with (and financing of) the creepy Independence Party?
Do you know how his money has infected and warped New York City politics?

Check out Wayne Barret's Village Voice archives and find all of the stories he's done about Bloomberg and other powerful New Yorkers that most of the media in this town completely ignores.

Fascinating

A couple of years ago I blogged about a book called The Works which looked at the "anatomy" of NYC -- where our electricity and water come from, where our trash goes, how our traffic and pedestrians move around the city, etc. While reading it, I could only think of what Mr Spock would have said: "Fascinating." Fascinating because there are whole worlds that exist within this city that we never see but vital to our security and way of life. 

Recently I read a couple of new articles that also got me thinking in a similar vein. And, again, Spock's voice rang in my head. 

This month the Atlantic has a tremendous article about how the Secret Service operates in this town during the UN General Assembly. If the expression "the weight of the world on their shoulders" was ever apt, it's for the US Secret Service which converges on NYC each fall when the General Assembly meets. They are responsible for the safety of every single world leader who comes to town including, as profiled in this article, that nutty President of Iran. Considering that NYC is a perennial terrorist target, along with the challenges of shepherding all of the worlds' CEOs around a crowded town, it's amazing to read about what these people do to keep not only these powerful people but also all of us safe. Something they do -- but that we never see.

Then there's another reality in this city that we all live in but almost never see: the economic reality of NYC. In America, as we know, the distribution of wealth, the gap between rich and poor, has never been larger. NYC is just like America, only more so, and the gap between rich and poor in this city is even larger than the national average. In his final piece for the Village Voice, Tom Robbins crunches the numbers and paints a devastating picture, not only of the gross economic disparities in this town, but of the political class in this city and state that serves to protect the elite at the expense of the poor. Republicans and Democrats have done everything they can to short shrift city workers, cut social services, underfund our schools, decimate the unions -- while giving tax breaks to the rich. Robbins writes about a corporate group called "The Committee to Save New York" which is run by a bunch of rich people. One of the members of this organization, which claims it wants to "save" our great city, is Rob Speyer -- yes, a Speyer of Tischman-Speyer which was responsible for the biggest real estate debacle in this (or any) city's history. Yes, this same man believes he is qualified to "save" New York. Did you know that? Well now you do.


Fascinating.

Magic & Loss: Bob Fass RIP and City COVID Stories and ... Start the Presses!

One of Lou Reed's great songs is called "Magic & Loss." He croons:

There's a bit of magic in everything

And some loss to even things out ...

Those words, to me, sum up life: life is magical, people are magical, nature and the world around us are magical, our creations our magical, everything and everyone contains magic ... but loss is magic's constant companion, it's sorrowful sidekick. And the best way to negotiate life is to love both -- the magic of everything and the loss that accompanies. They are both inevitable. If you can appreciate this paradoxical beauty of life, I believe, than you have achieved a simple yet greater kind of wisdom. 

This concept of "magic and loss" occurred to me recently when I read several disparate articles about occurences that, more than anything, have impacted the soul of New York City. As you read and think about them, you appreciate the magic of the people we have in this city, the loss of many of them that this last year has inflicted, while also feeling somewhat optimistic about our future.

There is the loss of the legendary NYC radio host Bob Fass. His show "Radio Unknowable" was broadcast on WBAI for 50 years, where he interviewed Bob Dylan and many other brilliant artists, thinkers, and public figures. He was the closest thing that NYC had to an "underground radio host", as his obituary describes him. His show was part of the gritty Bohemian spirit of the city, the subconscious turned into radio signals. As someone who writes an "underground blog" about NYC, Bob Fass was a weird kind of soul brother for me, a fellow restless spirit who never lost his fascination for the city, its people, and all its crazy undercurrents. Magic & Loss. 

Then there are these individual stories of New Yorkers who have been impacted by COVID-19 over the last year. These are the stories you don't see in the news but they are the quiet stories, the unique experiences, of people in NYC dealing with this global pandemic. It involves illness, death, misery but also survival and hope. It's about as clear an example of the Magic & Loss of and in life that I can think of. 

But then, in the midst of all this, a miracle! Something has come back to life! Specifically the Village Voice. Four years ago it went out of business, totally shuttered. Now it's back and even in print! This long history of the notorious free rag and how it came back to life is worth a read. It's a story of the city, of the press, and how the two inform and shape NYC. The Voice coming back to life after it seemed dead and gone forever is miraculous. It's a bit of magic after the loss that proves how Magic & Loss are forever intertwined, constant companions, and never predictable. 

We Won't See Their Likes Again

Former Village Voice reporter Wayne Barrett and former Screw magazine publisher Al Goldstein, couldn't be more different. 

One is a deeply respected journalist who shone a bright light on the dark doings of New York's political world. The other is an infamous pornographer who published a very filthy magazine and hosted a really dirty cable show here in NYC called Midnight Blue. Love or hate this saint and sinner, they were both amazingly good at what they did, and both made a real impact on the worlds of politics and sex in NYC.

Now they are both out of work. 

Wayne Barrett is no longer with the Voice (as I blogged about here last month) and Al Goldstein's magazine and TV show folded up a few years ago. Both in their golden years, the times have changed and conspired to pass them by. Part of it is the decline of print journalism and the rise of the web (devastating both to newspaper and porn finances), and part of it is the fact that NYC is no longer the gritty, dirty city it once was -- and Wayne and Al were most certainly gritty New Yorkers. Instead, guys like this have been superseded by the likes of Gawker and Burning Angel, slick sites that are more representative of this increasingly slick city.


It's hard to believe how long these guys practiced their respective trades in this town. For thirty-plus years their work was read and consumed by New Yorkers of all ages, races, colors and backgrounds. Now they've been replaced by a new generation who owe them a debt they probably don't recognize. And NYC is a little the lesser for it.

We'll probably never see their likes again.

Old Downtown Lives Again

There are fewer stars that shine brighter -- and here on Earth -- than Barbara Streisand. One of the most famous, beloved, and acclaimed singer and actresses (and even director) of all time, she has blazed a glorious trail, a Jewish girl from Brooklyn who conquered showbusiness and Hollywood in the 1960s -- and continues to reign to this day. 

Movies like Funny Girl, The Way We Were, A Star is Born, Yentl, The Prince of Tides, The Mirror Has Two Faces and others have burnished her in cinematic history. Her songs -- and that voice! -- are instantly recognizable. She is one of the most famous entertainers who ever lived.

So now, after more than 60 years in showbusiness, Barbara is going back to the beggining. She has a released a new album, Live At the Bon Soir, that is a recording of performances she gave at the funky Greenwich Village basement nightclub in early November 1962 when she was just starting out. She croons old-timey songs, her voice so young and energetic, and there is such a confidence, such a pure beauty in her voice that it's no surprise that she became a huge star in the years right after. This album has apparently been sitting in Barbara's vault for more than half-a-century and only now is she giving it to the world. The world of old downtown Manhattan, of the early 1960s Greenwich Village arts scene, is long gone but these recordings, and Barbra's talent, are perennial -- a reminder that great work leaves an lasting legacy. 

But not all of old Downtown is gone -- on Elizabeth Street, in what is today called NoLita, is a butcher shop that's been in business since 1923 and is still going strong: Albanese Meats and Poultry. It's now being run by the 4th generation of the Albanese family, its super-old fashioned meat story in one of the city's trendiest neighborhoods. Everything about this place is old school and yet it's not old school -- it is a living, breathing part of Downtown, old but not out. 

Downtown, like NYC as a whole, is always alive -- even in the past.

Classic Mr NYC

This week the Village Voice came out with its Best of NYC (it seems like all the newspapers and magazines in this town are always doing "best of" the city things and quite frankly it gets overwhelming! With all these different best of lists, how do we know what's really THE best of the best? Gets confusing).

But I digress.

The Voice's Best Ensemble Improv Comedy Ensemble this year goes to Elephant Larry, the wacky sketch comedy group that this spring did a brilliant show based entirely on the shlocky 1997 movie Con Air. I saw the show and it was hi-larious (I also saw the movie and it was hilarious too but I laughed at it, not with it, which I'm sure wasn't the filmakers' intention).

Anyway, I did a short interview with one of the members of Elephant Larry in April and he told me all about their particular brand of comedy and how they've survived in NYC. Check it out here.

There Must Be 50 Ways to Love NYC

They don't call it the "rat race" for nuttin'. 

Sometimes living in NYC is like being a rat -- a desperate, exhausting, frantic race for survival. A rat will do anything to survive, and survivin' in NYC is all that and more.

But we live here because we know -- we know! -- in the the depths of our soul, in the recesses of our brains, in the lining of our bowels (okay, that was gross) that all the expense and craziness of NYC is worth it. Damn worth it. Because if a New Yorker is forced to live anywhere else, they might just start to consider suicide. 

Today I heard Nora Ephron on the radio say that when she moved to California as a child, she didn't care how great the weather was -- she wanted to go back to NYC right away. 

On Saturday night I was walking around Bryant Park with my wife. The weather was perfect, the gorgeous buildings piercing the sky with their blasting lights. It was the perfect New York night. And my wife and I agreed that if you live in NYC and you look at this site and don't feel excited and grateful to live here, then you should leave immediately and move to ... wherever. 

In short, we New Yorkers live here because we have to. 

That is why I was so happy to find this latest blog post from the Village Voice entitled 50 Reasons to Be Pretty Damn Euphoric You Live in New York City. Authored by someone named Jen Doll, it's a great, brilliant piece, writing at it's finest. You should click on the link and read it here but I'll just give you a few of the best reasons:

47. There is always someone crazier than you. ALWAYS.

46. The view from the Brooklyn Bridge.

45. The view of the Brooklyn Bridge.

26. Smart people are the norm, not the exception. (Which doesn't mean they're sane, but at least no one's boring.)

13. There is an insane Korean day spa (Spa Castle) waiting for you in Flushing. And Russian and Turkish baths in the East Village.

6. You can be alone, but never feel lonely. And vice versa. But if you die and aren't found until a year later, you won't be the first.

This article was so effective that it it led to lots of "haters" making negative comments. And Ms. Doll brilliantly hit back. 

Remember: this is NYC. No one ever shrinks from a fight here.  

Au Revoir NY Press

I'm a little late in blogging about this but a week ago today the last issue of the NY Press was published.

I'm sure your shrug of shoulders or your "What's the NY Press?" thought is one of the reasons why it's gone under. The era of free "alternative" weekly newspapers is so very twentieth century. In this media age, such papers are dinosaurs. That asteroid called the Internet came crashing down and eradicated its kind.

Boo-hoo.

Personally I'm not that sad. Actually, I'm kind of happy about it. I know on this blog that I rant about how depressed I am whenever anything in this city closes or disappears -- bits and pieces of old NYC going away -- but this case is an exception. First, the NY Press was not a great, or even a particularly good, newspaper. It was little better than a college newspaper and, compared to some college papers that I've read, even worse. So this is no great loss to the culture. Second,  I sent them an article several months ago, hoping they'd run it, but they never did. It wasn't any worse than most of the stuff they put out so I don't know why they chose never to run it, and I never got an explanation (not that this was any great loss to the culture either). So I'm glad that whoever chose not to run it is probably out of a job. Obviously it'll never run now but I wasn't holding my breath anyway.

However, putting my feelings aside, the NY Press did have a pretty good run (1988-2011). Twenty-three years for any publication to last ain't bad, particularly in an expensive and crazy media environment like NYC (it was around almost as long as The Phantom of the Opera). 

The newspaper began as a New Journalism-contrarian-conservative-mean spirited "alternative" to the  "alternative" Village Voice. No liberal pansies them -- oh no, they were "real Americans" giving it to NYC "straight." Needless to say, their glory years were the 1990s when Bill Clinton was president and they loved, loved, loved savaging the otherwise popular in NYC commander-in-chief. Like all good conservatives, the paper was also totally hypocritical too -- when they weren't screaming about liberals undermining "traditional values," they were publishing graphic articles on sex and running ads for escort agencies. 

Sadly for them, however, the 2000s brought tougher times. The presidency of their much beloved George W Bush turned into a disaster -- it was one thing to attack a president they hated but it was another thing to have to defend a president everyone else hated -- thus exposing the bankruptcy of the conservative ideology they had been peddling all those years (which I'm sure disillusioned their readers). Their best sex writers left. The economy sucked. The founder and owner Russ Smith eventually had to sell the paper and the new owners had no vision, no plan to keep it relevant in the Internet age. Worst of all, the NY Press was one of those papers under constant crises -- writers and editors were constantly coming and going, they had feuds with one another that went public; it got vicious. Then the money ran out.

And the rest is history. 

So au revoir NY Press. You're a victim of circumstance. You're not the first and certainly won't be the last to bear the brunt of these tough times. But I'll admit it -- the only thing that makes me sad about your closure is that you're not taking the New York Post with you. 

Lenny Letter RIP

Lena Dunham, she of Girls and much social/gender/racial/political/you-name-it controversy, has shut down her media company Lenny Letter. 

It was a "female-empowerment" online magazine that published articles be celebrities and various prominent women thinkers about the challenges of being a successful woman in this male dominated culture. 

The reason is clear: lack of money, lack of advertisers, and, presumably, lack of readers.

It's too bad that this didn't succeed and it's just another depressing reminder that it's very hard to do work that promotes social justice while also being profitable.

Along with the closing of the Village Voice, more and more important voices are being drowned out by the digital mob. 

Eat and Drink in Williamsburg

Continuing with the food themes of today, I would be remiss in not pointing out that, when it comes to eating and drinking in this town, Williamsburg is a world all its own. (I would be remiss in not  pointing out that I have personally spent next to no time in Williamsburg. Therefore I am not an expert on food and drink in this 'hood. But that doesn't mean I can't point out to my faithful audience what a great place it is to go to eat, drink, and make merry in). To whit: 

The Village Voice has a great article on something called Smorgasburg, an outdoor food festival held every Saturday through November. The article gives some great advice on some of the best food items you can get there -- and man, do they look scrumptious!

Also, yours truly went to a bar recently in Williamsburg called Berry Park. Now I'm not much of a bar hound but, whenever I find one in this town that I like, I feel the need to give it "props." Unlike crampy, noisy bars in Manhattan, Berry Park is a big, open space (I think the building used to be a factory). It has a huge downstairs area and, even better, a great roof deck with a gorgeous view of the Manhattan skyline. They have a great selection of beers and the people who work there are very friendly. There are lots and lots of bars in Williamsburg and I'm sure many others could tell you about other great places but, if you're ever in need of a bar in this neighborhood, you can't go wrong with Berry Park.

Finally, the nation appears to be falling in love with waitresses from Williamsburg. A new show on CBS called 2 Broke Girls appears to be a big hit and it is about ... guess what?

If any of you can know of other great eating and drinking options in Williamsburg, please feel free to share!

Making of the Mayor 2025

This blog has existed for two decades under three different NYC mayors. Unsurprisingly I have a blogged from time to time about the mayors and the elections that make them.

You can read that archive here. 

Currently there is a very crowded Democratic primary for mayor that includes a Muslim Socialist, a disgraced ex-Governor (and they're the frontrunners), yet another doomed Comptroller, and a bunch of Others. In some ways this primary resembles the 1977 mayoral election -- an unpopular, failed mayor who has become so irrelevant that the question isn't should he be replaced but by who, and lots of people are running to be that replacement.

And one of them might be a guy named Cuomo. 

Recently there was a contentious debate amongst the candidates, and it's clear how high the stakes are for each of them -- and the city.

But the bigger, more unanswerable question is "what makes a good mayor?" 

Elections and campaigns are all about who is the best, most appealing candidate but, sadly, that doesn't always translate into doing the best job. And as this article states, most of all, New Yorkers think being a good mayor means being a good manager. They think the mayor should essentially be a great COO, making sure that city services are delivered consistently and well, keeping the metaphorical trains running, supervising the machinery of government and ensuring its smooth operation.

Here's the dirty secret: managing the city isn't really the job of the mayor.

Part of the job of the mayor is appointing the people who manage the city, and then appointing the people who manage the managers. The real job of the mayor is to make policy, to sign or veto laws passed by the City Council, to work with the state and federal goverment to get the city money and laws favorable to it, to be the city's main cheerleader and public spokesperson -- and to handle all of the politics that flow from all that.

In short, the job of the mayor is not to manage the city on a daily basis -- it's to determine the course of its history for years and decades to come. Mayors need to be big picture thinkers, visionaries, conducting the great orchestra of city government, policy, politics, and media -- not just be its manager. 

Sadly whoever becomes the next mayor will be not have the same kind of robust local reporters covering them. For example, the great NYC muckraker Tom Robbins has died. He wrote, on and off, for the Village Voice for decades, and who lifted the stones and looked underneath what was going on in this city for decades. His kind are becoming obsolete and this city, no matter who runs it, will be all the poorer for it.