Is the Internet turning Dia de los Muertos into a bummer?

Without the Internet:

  1. There wouldn’t be so many white people in the Mission trying to gentrify the festivities
  2. The absence of white people gentrifying things in the Mission would negate the need for the politicization of formerly stoic, spiritual, neighborhood traditions

Burn the Internet!

[Photo by Rusty Hodge]

[related-posts]

13 reasons why our pal Daisy hates Dolores Park

I love Daisy. Her latest for Thrillist is “Why I Hate Something You Probably Love: Dolores Park” and I don’t hate it. Here’s the beginning:

If you ask almost any San Franciscan where they like to hang out on sunny days, they’ll give you the same answer: Dolores Park. Something about the good weather and the people and the close proximity to the three-hour wait for Bi-Rite ice cream. They just cannot get enough of Dolores Park. And by “they”, I mean “you”. YOU LOVE IT.

And hey, good on you. I’m all for people loving what they love. But in this case, I just don’t get it — at all. Dolores Park actually totally sucks. Like, I would rather be burned by one of the fire-swirling hula hoopers than have to hang out there for an afternoon. Before you judge, read my 13 reasons why.

Read on for the 13 reasons.

[Photo by Leland Zuñiga, via It’s Always Sunny in San Francisco]

TK riffs on SF Weekly’s 90s point of view

[via Tom Tomorrow]

After coming across SF Weekly’s online archive, TK over at 40 Going on 28 gives a modern perspective to their 1990s take on the local food scene.

There’s lots of fun stuff in there, but I’m enjoying reading the restaurant reviews, mostly because almost every restaurant reviewed no longer exists and because the prices listed for the food seem hilariously low.

Anyone remember Paella La Movida, on 16th between Guerrero and Dolores?  I don’t.  I guess it was where Mozzeria is now.

La Movida is the latest snappy addition to a corridor of 16th Street between Dolores and Mission that has lately been blooming with boho chic. These days the neighborhood, with its slightly seedy glamour, seems a lot like the East Village in New York, or Earls Court in London.

More here.

And I agree, R.I.P. Dave Eggers’ Smarter Feller.

[h/t Burrito Justice]

Gentrification as immigration

In a piece titled “Stop Complaining About Gentrification Unless You Know What It Is,” io9 editor Annalee Newitz looks a little deeper at the topic of the day:

Gentrification is a form of immigration, though almost nobody calls it that. People who gentrify are usually new transplants to a city, changing it to suit their particular cultural needs and whims. That’s why the criticism of gentrification often sounds like a distorted version of anti-immigrant sentiment: “They have changed our neighborhoods; their shops and homes are repulsive; we no longer feel welcome here.” The difference is that the people we call immigrants are usually not rich. Gentrifiers are.

She then looks at Istanbul and Paris, and obviously San Francisco, and eventually draws this conclusion:

When different immigrant groups struggle with each other to reshape the city, gentrification is one possible outcome. There are other possible outcomes, too. City planners can manage development so that there is enough room for neighborhoods to grow without kicking anyone out. A recent study revealed that creating income-segregated neighborhoods leads to less social mobility for everyone, cementing us into a rigidly class-divided society. More than anything, we need to prevent neighborhoods from becoming divided by class.

A first step would be to revise our attitude toward immigration in cities. Instead of seeing immigrants as aliens, we should welcome their fresh perspectives, their wealth of new cultural traditions — and yes, their cash infusions. As twentieth century cities swell into twenty-first century megacities, we must make room for all our immigrant populations, rich and poor alike. The only crime is in sacrificing one to make way for the other.

The only crime. Read on for lots more data and storytelling and relevant photos.

[Photo by Andrew Sarkarati]

[related-posts]

Times when Rolling Stone’s Tim Dickinson has said ‘So it begins’ on Twitter

//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js And finally:

//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

So whatever “it” is, it definitely involves the military, hackers, zombies, brain experiments — and Google moving into the Mission.

[related-posts]

2 Culture Sportscasters

In the comments section of last week’s post about a Valencia Street boutique offering a “punk princess” interior design for your toddler’s room, commenter Sean began a comment thusly:

I’ve lived in the neighborhood on and off since ’99. [link]

To which a new voice known as 2 Culture Sportscasters delivered the following analysis:

“He’s gone in with 99, that’s a strong date there, good opening, good opening.”

“Yes, 99 is a real strong date, going to be hard to complete with that, Paul, but he could get in trouble there, 99 during the first boom and all”

“That’s true, that’s true, but many of the other competitors probably don’t have a good hold on when that first boom was happening, remember the Pets.com ad didn’t appear until 2000, that would’ve been many of these other sportsmen’s first exposure to dot-com, and that’s a full year after 99″

“You’re right, you’re right, but he’s also got the on and off, that’s open to question, of course”

“I think that’s close enough, these other guys probably have a number so far past 99 that on and off isn’t going to make any difference here, but we’ll see”

“Yes, we’ll see, we’ll see! Well, it’s a great opener so far! A great day here, and can I just say the weather is gorgeous? You can’t beat that early October!”

So, yeah, there is good stuff in the comments section. Occasionally.

Assemblymember Tom Ammiano supports local “Jack Off” movement

Yeah, the “Jack Off” movement. You know, to stop Fifth & Pacific’s upscale menswear chain, not the other kind of jack, how dare you think I was making a lewd inference in order to get you to read yet another article about this company. Both Ammiano and former President of the Board of Supervisors Matt Gonzalez support a new appeal. The two are authors of the formula retail ordinance, and believe that the company has acted in bad faith, not holding a hearing and muscling their way in through technicalities.

But they love our gentrification!

Andy Blue sends in the press release, describing the next steps to keep the shop out of the Mission. Full text after the jump:

JACK SPADE OPPONENTS RETURN FIGHT TO CITY HALL
WITH EXPANDING SUPPORT FROM POLS AND COMMUNITY GROUPS

Author of formula retail ballot measure, Assemblymember Tom Ammiano:
“Jack Spade has operated in bad faith”


Matt Gonzalez, Aaron Peskin; Supes Campos, Avalos,
and Mar support the appeal.

SAN FRANCISCO –– Backed by the original drafters of San Francisco’s formula retail ordinance, the coalition fighting to stop designer menswear line, Jack Spade, from opening a new store in the Mission District, heads to City Hall this Wednesday, October 9 (City Hall, Room 416, 5:00pm) to request a rehearing before the Board of Appeals.

Continue reading “Assemblymember Tom Ammiano supports local “Jack Off” movement”

Casting call for “Looking”

Formerly called “The Untitled Michael Lannan Project”, HBO’s new series about a few gay men who design video games and hang out in Mission bars is now casting for background extras. They have a “constant need for 20s-30s Hipsters/Mission Neighborhood types & LGBT Community”. And you “must be able to pull off Hipster vibe with your own clothes or style”. Make of that what you will.

Birds At Evening
[random Mission file photo by me]

Quit waiting around for the Real World narcissists to come to your neighborhood bar and get out there and get on this show! Then send us back some reports from the set!

UPDATE: Doc Pop notices that they’re shooting at Doc’s Clock today.

//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

[related-posts]

Even Newsom is concerned about Tech’s effect on the SF housing market

Or is he . . . ? He deleted this tweet shortly after he tweeted it. Maybe because it could be seen as criticizing Twitter on Twitter? Maybe because he would seem hypocritical to be concerned about San Francisco’s shifting demographics? Who knows, maybe he was hacked. Maybe he meant it in a positive way, that the Twitter IPO could finally clear out any remaining undesirables. Wait, wait, maybe I’m being too harsh on ol’ Newsom. It was just an ellipsis with an extra dot. Who can know what meaning lay beneath that fourth little dot . . . . ?