From the NY Times:When it comes to the attractions of a particular house or apartment, there’s little mystery as to why space-starved New Yorkers are drawn to generous square footage, high ceilings and jaw-dropping views.
But over time, residents find less-obvious design elements unexpectedly alluring, not only faux fireplaces but also weirdly shaped alcoves, decommissioned dumbwaiters, Juliet balconies, claw-foot bathtubs, minuscule shelves carved into staircases, transoms atop doors, brass keyholes and vintage radiators. The list includes even more unlikely details, among them servants’ buttons, speaking tubes, original metal thermostats and shaving closets. (Most people don’t even know what a shaving closet is: a shallow alcove with a sink just large enough for a man to trim his whiskers.)
These mundane grace notes, which may seem to have little purpose beyond collecting dust, are sometimes the very things residents single out to explain why they are drawn to a particular space. On occasion, these homely accents even prove to be the selling point when it comes to closing a deal.
Scholars and others who analyze why New Yorkers are so enamored of these accents invariably end up talking about the mysterious pull of the past.
In a fast-changing city like New York, the appetite for signs of a vanished era may be especially strong.
You mean people prefer older homes with a personality and a history?
33 comments:
Oh come on now. No one wants the long term whining resident that falls into rent stabilization and has a memory that goes back to a time when people (and government) cared for your block and community.
The perfect world to Honest Joe and the boys are transients:
1. illegal immigrants who stay in the background, get exploited by landlords and employers and sometimes become mindless little tweeders that support the patrones in Tammany. Home decor: Early Sidewalk with a good dose of bedbugs.
2. the cosmopolitan set always jetting down to Bermuda and similarly havens for corporate crooks. Home decor: immpressing Eurotrash, spending a small fortune on stuff of questionable taste that is only to impress others of similar ilk.
3. Tower kids: meet, mate, and move. end of discussion. Home Decor: something daddy bought, crate n barrel, beer can collections.
Boy your grumpy.
But really wanted to add the fact that these older homes were better built as well and will stand the test of time better. I'd much prefer to restore an older home to it's former glory than live in the new "Queens Crap" being built today.
I seem to recall someone around here saying the "stripper pole" in the living room was the "little thing" that clinched the deal on their apartment.
Was that Ridgewoodian? I can't remember.....
To be fair - you don't appreciate what you never had. I can't criticize the generation after me if the generation before destoyed all the nice little things that make a house a home.
"..these older homes were better built.."
Reminds me of when I tore the walls of my house down to renovate. The 2x4" studs actually measured 2x4".
Plaster walls look sturdy. Not bouncy-wouncy like drywall.
Deke DaSilva: I seem to recall someone around here saying the "stripper pole" in the living room was the "little thing" that clinched the deal on their apartment.
Was that Ridgewoodian? I can't remember.....
Nope, don't THINK it was me, unless I was being droll. Maybe you're confusing me with the first episode of that Marriage Ref show. Jerry Seinfeld and I are practically twinsies. What convinced me to take my apartment was that it was a really nice place (although without a clawfoot bathtub, fake fireplace, or shaving closet), on a good block, in a neighborhood I already knew some and liked, where I had friends and acquaintances, the price was decent, and the landlady was a mensch, or whatever a lady mensch is. Eight and a half years all that remains true. And I didn't install the stripper pole until very recently.
Nice that you're always thinking about me, by the way.
Queens Crapper: You mean people prefer older homes with a personality and a history?
Not sure that history, important as it can be, is as important as personality. No one wants to live in a sterile, cookie-cutter environment. If someone were to build the housing equivilent of retro ballparks i'm sure they'd prove to be quite popular.
Older homes ARE better. Speaking of homes, can somebody please explain the rise of the ugly two family Fedder homes.
Row after row of two family Fedder homes taking up and entire block. They are ugly, cold buildings totally devoid of character.
"No one wants the long term whining resident that falls into rent stabilization and has a memory that goes back to a time when people (and government) cared for your block and community."
"No one wants to live in a sterile, cookie-cutter environment."
Sure they do. They're called socialists and communists!
shaving closets, clawfoot tubs, balconies that aren't death traps...
I made second comment.
Getting past the asthetics of these new homes, I've attended a few open houses, and I kid you not, the places shaked when I walked and others have mentioned the same. I'm only like 130 pounds.
I can't believe anyone would buy them. But, than on the other hand, most people buying them, arent living in them.
Anonymous:: Sure they do. [Want to live in a sterile, cookie-cutter environment.] They're called socialists and communists!
Well, seeing as how there are so few socialists or communists in this country that their numbers can essentially be reckoned as zero, I say again, without fear of meaningful contradiction: NO ONE wants to live in a sterile, cookie-cutter environment.
Well, seeing as how there are so few socialists or communists in this country that their numbers can essentially be reckoned as zero
Comrade Ridgewoodian, did you just say that this is the Year Zero?
Joking aside, I wouldn't go so far as to say "zero socialists or communists" in the U.S.
Check out this funny blog Zombietime, which periodically posts amusing photos of the menagerie of loony lefties in the San Francisco and Berkely area:
http://zombietime.com/sf_anti-war_rally_3-20-2010/
(I counted a couple hammer and sickle flags in that previous link!)
http://www.zombietime.com/
Lest ye forget, the crusty commie bookstore Revolution Books must still get a few customers, in order for the pinkos to afford the exorbitant rents at their 26th Street store in Manhattan:
http://www.revolutionbooksnyc.org/
Apparently the "Old Red Guard" doesn't much like Obama, if you scan their website, down below.
Enjoy!
I thought this thread was about the charm of old HOUSES . . . .
rather I see it's just more of the same old disgrunted whinings of a certain old COOT!
I see it's just more of the same old disgrunted whinings of a certain old COOT!
Babs, you're not that OLD! You look at least 5 years younger than you really are!
Deke - why you cannot stick to the subject in the thread is beyond my comphrension.
Oh, and here's one more, The New York Marxist School:
http://brechtforum.org/nyms
So there's a few communists and socialists in this country, some in NYC!
Deke DaSilva said...
"So there's a few communists and socialists in this country, some in NYC!"
No where near as many as there are beery, AM radio listening assholes.
...And about that handle:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nighthawks_%28film%29
---------------------------------
As for old vs new construction, I have noticed that the peak of interest in "pre war" apts seemed to have been almost 15 years ago.
All of the units that have been sold in my building over the last decade have undergone total gut renovation. Maid's rooms are removed as they take up space from a bedroom on the other side of the wall and the bathroom is then available to that bedroom. Dumbwaiters have been banned since our friends in the Bronx and Brooklyn decided to not wait for the cab and fill the chute with trash (1973), So now those of us who live in buildings where that never happened still lose this convenience. Most of the shaft areas are filled-in during makeover.
Our place has 10ft ceilings but since they are concrete, many elect to drop the height to 8 1/2 9ft and install recessed lighting.
Overall, I'd have to say that with the influx of younger residents in the city, newer construction is their preference.
As for old vs new construction, I have noticed.........to have been almost 15 years ago......yada blah yada blah......
Someone get me some Prozac.....check that......heroin.....this guy bores me to tears!
Overall, I'd have to say that with the influx of younger residents in the city, newer construction is their preference.
You have statistics to back this claim up, or are you pulling anecdotes outta your ass again!
"Overall, I'd have to say that with the influx of younger residents in the city, newer construction is their preference."
See comment #1 for the reason this is the case.
Deke DaSilva said...
Someone get me some Prozac.....check that......heroin.....this guy bores me to tears!
Why don't you just blow your brains out...make that singular.
Queens Crapper said...
"Overall, I'd have to say that with the influx of younger residents in the city, newer construction is their preference."
"See comment #1 for the reason this is the case."
Well, if you mean the comment about "beer can collection" That is much more likely to be the older generation's idea.
Kids like modernity -clean, sparse and easy to take care-of. They generally don't like musty old places.
You can make fun of these "tower people" but that is the future of our city. They often prefer apartments and being close to the action center, in this case Manhattan.
Either build/adapt housing for modern tastes or they will go elsewhere and Queens will become the dumping ground people on this board seem to fear.
That is in-part what killed the Bronx and huge sections of Brooklyn.
Nope, what I meant is that they prefer that because they are going to only be here temporarily. When they decide to settle down, they will move elsewhere - to the older house. With maturity comes taste. Despite the fact that the grammar schools in Manhattan are teeming with the offspring of yuppies, the fact of the matter is once they reach junior high age, the folks are still packing it in and heading to the 'burbs, not shopping around for modern living.
Q-C I actually agree somewhat on that last comment.
Look at it this way, if you provide desirable housing for them when they are young, there is a much better chance of them settling down in the borough when they have a family. You get them in the door before you can make the sale.
This has been one of the major impediments in trying to stabilize the Bronx --it has such a bad rep from the 60s-early 90s that it's difficult to get a stable, white middle class to consider living there even when they are single.
As for this statement:"Despite the fact that the grammar schools in Manhattan are teeming with the offspring of yuppies, the fact of the matter is once they reach junior high age, the folks are still packing it in and heading to the 'burbs"
You might want to check that. The schools public and private are -bursting- K-12 and most of the recent high rise developments here have been marketed as "family friendly" with 3-5 bdrms, play areas etc.
I don't know where all these people come up with the money to buy these large apts and support families..but the units sell.
A large tower on third ave @81st that had been 140+ one bedroom rental was converted to 2-4 bdrm condo's and sold out before the renovations finished a year ago.
There are several other new buildings here specifically catering to families and they are slowly filling up.
The 'burbs aren't the draw they were back in the bad old days.
Apparently they are since Manhattan actually lost population last year for the first time in decades.
"Look at it this way, if you provide desirable housing for them when they are young, there is a much better chance of them settling down in the borough when they have a family. You get them in the door before you can make the sale."
They live in Manhattan and LIC to sew their wild oats. It's not seen as a place to settle down. That's why they are so concerned with property value, which always increases over time. They aren't looking about 10 or 15 years down the road, but more like 3-4.
Deke DaSilva: Joking aside, I wouldn't go so far as to say "zero socialists or communists" in the U.S.
Apparently you don't read very well. I didn't write that there are NO socialists/communists but that there are so few that there are EFFECTIVLY no socialists/communists. Divide the number of socialist/communists in the country by the total population and you'll find that as a percentage of the population they represent something far, far less than 1%. Even the writer of that dubious article about the anti-war demo (how does he know that EACH AND EVERY participant was a left wing wacko - did he talk to each and every one of them?) recogonized that the demonstrators represented a vanishingly small portion of the population.
Anonymous: They live in Manhattan and LIC to sew their wild oats. It's not seen as a place to settle down.
Me, I'm not married, I don't have kids so I've not had to confront these issues myself. But I have friends and acquaintances who are married with children and I've seen what they've gone through. For the most part they've longed to stay in the city - one couple I know spent a year and more looking for a suitable place for themselves - but have been priced into the suburbs.
"Queens Crapper said...
Apparently they are since Manhattan actually lost population last year for the first time in decades."
The fact that NYC, specifically Manhattan is in the bullseye of this financial sector-led recession might have something to do with that...ya think?
The bulk of those leaving are not likely to be headed for the 'burbs...they are headed home.
And those families with Manhattan lifestyles can afford to keep them? No, they move to the 'burbs.
I didn't write that there are NO socialists/communists but that there are so few that there are EFFECTIVLY no socialists/communists.
Well, this can lead to absurd arguments over "how do you define a communist", which I don't care to get into.
But I'm willing to bet that there are far less "right wing miltia" types in this country than YOU believe there are!
Me, I'm not married
There's a good reason for that, it's evident when you look in the mirror every morning.
I don't have kids so I've not had to confront these issues myself.
The human race breathes a collective sigh of relief!
For the most part they've longed to stay in the city - one couple I know spent a year and more looking for a suitable place for themselves - but have been priced into the suburbs.
Translation of Ridgewoodian's Double Speak - His friends can't afford a neighborhood in NYC with a "good school", i.e. a school with lots of Asians and whites, so they've been forced to move to the suburbs in order to protect their children.
Nothing wrong with that logic, I'd do it myself, and I freely admit it! I don't have to cloak my language in double speak for fear of the liberal thought police!
Ridgewoodian: Me, I'm not married
Deke DaSilva: There's a good reason for that, it's evident when you look in the mirror every morning.
I don’t know what to say to such an insightful and mature comment except:
I’m rubber,
You’re glue,
What you say bounces off me
And sticks on YOU!
Motherfucker.
Ridgewoodian: I don't have kids so I've not had to confront these issues myself.
Deke DaSilva: The human race breathes a collective sigh of relief!
See above and do, please, attempt to stop fucking your own mother; it’s nasty.
Deke DaSilva: Translation of Ridgewoodian's Double Speak - His friends can't afford a neighborhood in NYC with a "good school", i.e. a school with lots of Asians and whites, so they've been forced to move to the suburbs in order to protect their children.
Actually, no. Before they moved and before they started having kids the wife in the specific couple I was thinking of taught at a private school. If she had continued there she would have been able to send her kids to that school for free. So that wasn’t a major issue for them. And even if that hadn’t been the case my impression was that they would have been comfortable sending their kids to school in Astoria, where they lived. In any case, I know that they very much wanted to stay in Astoria; before they met they had both lived there and even before they married they had bought a tiny house there together. Alas, it was too small a house to raise kids in, unless they had them sleep in the basement or the garage - and they knew they wanted to have kids. As I wrote before, they spent a year and more looking for a suitable place all over Brooklyn and Queens. At one point they put in a bid on a house in Ridgewood and I thought they might become my neighbors, but they got outbid. In the end, despite their best efforts, they had to look just north of the City, where they found a nice place on a quite street. It’s a good home, but I have no doubt, talking to them, that they’d rather be in the City.
Care to comment on anything else you know nothing about?
Deke DaSilva: I'm willing to bet that there are far less [sic] "right wing miltia [sic]" types in this country than YOU believe there are!
I’m sorry, did I miss something? Have I mentioned the militias recently or at all? How do you presume to know what I think or believe unless I tell you? As it happens, you’d lose your bet: I don’t doubt that the militias are mostly a lunatic fringe, albeit, unfortunately, a loud and well-armed fringe. So what do I win on your wager?
Post a Comment