Staff Blog
Philebrity thinks of gentrifying Camden; Camden says no thanks
 |
Our friends over at Philebrity got all kinds of thoughtful today after seeing our awesome cover (and, no doubt, sidebar), bringing up such arcane topics as urban planning and renewal and telling us all how they've got the right ideas for the beleaguered city to the East. That's a tall order. But hey, they're over in Fishtown, right? They should know about this kind of stuff. Let's break down their argument.
"This is one of those situations where the thing you imagine is much, much better than what a thing really is."
As in, the thought process that went in to this post.
"Riding by a City Paper honor box..."
As in, "I read it every week but have trouble admitting that."
"Having seen the Gentrification Wars ... all of the aforementioned neighborhoods are now literally teeming with assholes who would never have set foot in them a mere decade ago."
This moment of irony presented without any further comment.
"So pardon me, Mike Newall, if i table your Pulitzer Lust-y tale of People Getting Lost In The System..."
So, pardon him, Mike Newall, as he exchanges a relevant and compelling story that was reported in the streets of one of America's most dangerous cities for small-world, insulated thoughts conjured from the comfort of an armchair.
"Camden is actually kind of beautiful. And it’s so fucked."
Possibly the only two intellectually honest statements in this rant.
"But it’s also free of so many of the problems that make getting anything done in Philly such a nightmare."
The same way the logic in this rant is free of the information provided in a basic Google search? Allow us. Camden has been mired in administrative inefficiency and endemic poverty for decades, making it the exact opposite of "free." More than 25,000 of the 70,600 people there live below the poverty level, which helps decimate family-generated local tax revenue and hinders doing anything creative with the local economy outside of the waterfront attractions. Little gets done in Camden because, for years, the local government barely had control of its own city, with the state controlling the purse-strings of schools and downtown development. That state control is expected to be expanded, so basic needs, like paving roads and updating hospitals, can take place.
The strength of its future economy doesn't look much better. More than half of the poor are children, and they are also subjected to a scandal-ridden school system.
"So let’s take it back to the old school and make Camden a theoretical annex of Philly."
How original!
"Find a stretch of a few blocks, get some established Philly business people to throw down some dough and see what happens: Open a Cantina Dos Thirdos there, or a kind of Standard Tap-py place. Throw down some Pergo in some of the shitbox houses and rent ‘em out to UArts kids."
Right. Go tell a developer/restaurant owner/whatever to work with a state that was ranked second-to-last when it comes to business tax friendliness. Also go tell that owner that no, the aforementioned poverty-stricken population likely won't be providing much in the way of consumer business or Pergo-floored home ownership. Philebs also fails to mention that exactly these type of developments are already being attempted along the waterfront — and there's not much else in the pipeline.
The crime in this post isn't that they are suggesting a grand experiment of urban renewal — everyone can agree that it would be a great thing if Camden could get on its feet and exchange creative and actual revenue with Philadelphia. The problem is that they HAVEN'T THOUGHT ABOUT IT. To top it off, they brush aside a well-written story that accurately highlights just one of those deep-rooted problems and instead subject their readers to incomplete and erroneous posturing.
Anyway.
this will not end well.
Oh, man. Sweeney’s post reeks of white liberal guilt, and yet his suggestions for renewal are the whitest ideas imaginable. So all we need to do is turn Camden into a hipster haven? Do what you do best, Joey: staying out of civic discourse and posting YouTube videos of shitty local fusion bands.
I cannot believe you guys took such umbrage at such a proudly well-thought-out and serious post. On second thought, I can. Yes, I can.
it’s so cute when they backpedal. squeak squeak squeak.
You’re right, Anon. Until a couple of dickhurt alt-weekly writers came along and cried in our spilt milk, we really thought we’d cracked this whole “Camden” thing wide open.
Perhaps a reopening of Buff Hall to hardcore shows would do the trick. Get The Evens to play for old times’ sake (except hopefully Ian MacKaye doesn’t get hit by a car).
Sweeney:
First off, thanks for commenting.
But, you know, I’d say the party doing the crying here is the guy who:
a) Wrote a disingenuous post.
b) Backtracked all over his weak argument when called on it. (Oh, you didn’t mean any of it? We thought you said Camden “…has been something that’s been on my mind for a while, actually.†I guess we got the wrong idea!)
c) Resorts to cute little phrases when called on his backtracking.
Go figure.
Tom,
I’m thinking that I’ve already paid too much attention to this fine example of cut-and-paste blogging. However, let me be clear: When I wrote the original post in question, the whole point was to be disingenuous, to the point of being downright offensively thoughtless, culturally entitled and borderline racist. THAT WAS THE JOKE, SON. I’m glad you picked up on some of that in the text, just in case the headline — “People, Seriously: Let’s Get Together And Gentrify The Shit Out Of Camden This Weekend” — didn’t tip you off.
I think the real issue here is that I decided to piss all over your oh-so-precious by-the-numbers alt-weekly cover story, which deep down, a lot of you know, people ain’t reading. And I know it stings, but c’mon. Don’t shoot the messenger.
That’s my job.
Over and out,
Angelo Amorosi
[...] We always have our lovely, wonderful commenters. Speaking of comments, you may want to check out this little bit of hand-on-heart-ness over at The Clog, in case you actually thought we were seriously considering colonizing Camden. (Another shot to [...]
Sweeney:
Here’s the problem: your last comment is a lie. I mean, we all think it’s kind of cute when you hide behind the “you don’t take me seriously, do you?!†sarcasm, followed by the “alt-weeklies are stupid!†defense, but everyone kind of knows you’re doing some serious backtracking. I guess it’s hard to admit that?
Anyway, congrats on the successful weekend chat! The readers really ate that up!
Best to get back to work, “son.â€
Tom, I’ll backtrack all over the place if that’s what is warranted. And Lord knows I’ve done plenty of it; Philebrity gets things wrong all the time, and we admit that. This is not one of those cases. This is entirely about some weird take-one-for-the-team/bruised ego shit on your part, and not a lot else. How seriously can you take that post? As seriously as you take yourself? I really hope not. Think of that post as our Obama New Yorker cover. That should give you a nice NPR-lite chuckle.
Joey:
What this is “about†is simple: you wrote a poorly-informed, douchebaggy post that you are now trying to pass off as satire. I don’t believe you. You’re also trying to draw attention away from your post with pathetic little personal slights. Clever!
Oh, and I understood what you meant before you drew the helpful comparison to the Obama cover. Please don’t flatter yourself.
Finally, we agree, almost: I DID write a poorly informed, douchebaggy post! That was the point!
Let us shake hands and be done with this. I have more poorly informed douchebaggery to get up to, and you have more bone-dry social analysis to get back to.
Also, you’re welcome for this, the most commented-upon post in your Clog career. Break out the champers!
Joey:
But does it really count when half of the comments came from myself, and the other half from a douchebag? It’s a tough call.
Fine. As we were.
if i could take a shit on literally all of you i probably would. just stand together in a little group and i’ll stand on a ladder and just shit everywhere. just. all over you.
mr. sweeney. shhhh.
mr. namako. shhhh.
what was it you were talking about? i got lost to the point of the post with all this pussy flapping at the end here.