Edited by author 02-15-2002 06:33 PM
I like how, according to Nick, San Francisco is "at the northern end of Silicon Valley." For the record, SF is not at the northern end of anything; it is not an appendage.

One cannot compare SF to any of the cities listed below. And why would one want to? Why does it need to "stack up"? It's not like any other city in the world and that is one reason why it is considered a mecca for many, many people.

This stereotyping of our neighborhoods indicates that he doesn't really know what goes on here. First of all, the Sunset is rich in many cultures. Not just Chinese. Does he assume that all people with slanted eyes come from China? We have Vietnamese, Japanese, Hong Kong People, Malay, Korean, Mainland Chinese, Taiwanese, etc. etc. etc. in our neighborhood. Those are in addition to Russians, Irish, Middle Eastern and an overall international mix. Including little old me from Los Angeles. Our local fishmonger is a Parisian transplant.

I think the seperatist ghetto is in Denton's mind. He sees somebody who speaks Spanish and assumes they are Mexican. The Mission happens to be another neighborhood that is diversely populated.

And those "wilder writers" moved to L.A. when people like Denton started showing up. I have many friends who were part of that siliconvalleyboomtime exodus to L.A., New Orleans, and NYC.

Denton's editorial is rife with fallacy but I don't have time to go point for point.

I don't think it's fair to cast such disparaging criticisms of a city one doesn't really know. Come to think of it, this reminds me of the Texans in Paris who claimed that Houston was better because:

1. There was more parking.
2. They had airconditioning.

Oh, and I entertain almost every weekend. Come to one of my dinner parties and see what it's all about. Or is the Sunset too foggy for you, Mr. Denton?

Nick, nice to see you here. That way we can beat you senseless in person. Much better.

I want to bruise you about two things in particular:

1) Please don't blame a region for what is said about it in Red Herring and Wired. These sentences -- "But, for a brief moment, SF/SV had an idea of itself as the center of the new world. The city set ambitious goals for itself. It failed, like a startup that can't live up to its own hype." -- indicate that you bought some of that hype yourself. Never, never confuse regular city inhabitants with Willie Brown (that was one of the few things in your piece that I agreed with). There's a big difference between a real city and its boosterism. It's like me thinking New York is crime-free because Giuliani turned Times Square into a theme park.

2) "...many San Francisco old-timers like the fact that it's a village..." Ah, what charming condescension. It's not a village. It's a city. Yes, it's smaller than New York, London, or Los Angeles, three of the largest cities in the world. But this blaming SF for not being NYC, London, or LA, well, it's like blaming a California roll for not being a knish.

I mean, if you simply said, "I miss New York (or LA, or whichever)," that'd be different. Fine, lots to miss. I don't think anyone here is saying SF is the same as London. I only lived in London for a year, more than a decade ago, and I still miss it. But it's hard for me to suffer much when here I can still get option paralysis any day of the week. (Thanks for that term, Zed.)

If you're pining for the fjords, get on the boat to Norway. But don't blame San Francisco Bay for not being the fjords. It wasn't the fjords when you got here, no matter what they said in the brochure. If you'd looked outside your cage, you could have figured that out for yourself.

I'm sure you have beautiful plumage.

Ahahahaha!

I'm glad the invasion of internet silliness occurred. It was a bit like Spring Break for about three years. And it left my condo worth several hundred $k more than it was back when me and my friends were just enjoying our geek lives!

I think that indoorsy people, who judge a place mostly by its urban whatever, tend to overlook the cool outdoors stuff we have here. Surfing, hanggliding, mountainbiking, sailing, easy access to skiing, peakbagging, etc..

When you go to Paris, or London, or New York, you immediately know you're in a 'world class' city. It just feels that way. Of all the West coast cities, San Francisco comes close but not quite. Kind of like Chicago with a 3rd dimension.

I visited a couple of years ago, and was struck by how far downhill the downtown area had gone, at least in comparison to my previous visit say 10 years earlier - aforementioned street people the main detraction. Cured any ideas I had about moving there (would never have considered the endless suburbia of Silicon Valley, gives me the willies just thinking about it.)

Something Tom hints at that needs amplification:

The hills! The farging HILLS! They look good from down below, they look good from the Bay, they make everything else look good when you're on 'em. Some have buildings, some are nice and green, one set sprouts a beautiful austere bridge to another, browner set 'o hills.

I grew up on congested Long Island; I find there's something utterly crushing and claustrophobic and directionless about flat, developed urban / suburban areas. I really got a kick out of Pittsburgh, the 3D city where I went to grad school, and San Fran, well DAMN, that's a city with lots of vertical relief!

Off-topic but I'm dying to know from Sheri E who and where the good fishmonger is in the Sunset. I need a good fishmonger. Honest. Email if you'd like: meg AT megnut.com

I have spent the last 4.5 years in SF as an art student at the Academy of Art College. While I grew from my time here, SF itself has left me underwhelmed.

What remains of the counter-culture the city is famous for, is more of a jaded, grungy, hippie-fallout that have lost the ideals that once were. Even in an art school, I find the energetic eccentricities to be particularly low. San Francisco is past its prime.

Haight-Ashbury has a GAP and a Ben & Jerry's on the intersection. Downtown is most notable for its abundance of smelly obnoxious bums. Everything costs more than anywhere else in the US (except perhaps NY). The metermaids are vicious to the point of rabid. Oh, and it's cold and foggy all the time.

Really the only reason the "Peace & love" monacker has stuck on SF is that it brings hordes of mulling tourists.

I have often wondered where the progressive cities are today, where the next "big thing" is coming from... I would have loved to live here in the 60's, but this place is only sliding farther from that energetic ideal.

Where are the boom towns of today? I would love to hear about any cool places anyone else knows about...

Thanks

San Francisco is overpriced, over-hped, and most of all OVERRATED.

The folks who diss SF in this 'Quick Topic' are absolutely correct! I've lived on the West Coast since '92, mostly in Seattle, now in Portland, as well as a year in SF (thank god only a year--that was MORE than enough!). Well, what can I say? At least I went there, gave it a go, and got it out of my system once and for all. Ugh. So overcrowded and impersonal. The cost of housing DEFINITELY does not reflect of VALUE of living there. You can easily get the same progressive, cosmopolitan, "left coast" vibe living in Portland or Seattle for a faaaar more reasonable price. San Francisco sucks. Why? Because while it might have been AWESOME for Jack Kerouack et al back in the 50's or 60's, it has long since lost it's lustre and the rabid capitalist scum (read that real estate assholes) have ruined it for counter-cultural artsy types. Let's face it: how can artists who are already totally underpaid in the USA really hope to make art, be in a band, write, etc. when they are ALWAYS having to worry about making rent? Fucking ridiculous, this $1,000/mo for an effin' studio apartment! Fuck that shit. Artists, leftists, and other creatives should leave SF in droves, and they are. I call bullshit on being fleeced by real estate assholes just to live in a huge, stinking, tourist trap that SF is. Overpriced, over-hyped, and over-crowded. Old, cool, awesome SF died back in 1970. That's the SF I will always love and hold dear in my mind. The SF of today is a shadow of it's former, much lovlier self.

--Snazmo