Thursday, January 12, 2006

Requiem for the Crescent City?

Many of us have been predicting for months that this would happen without swift action:

The passing of our most distinctive city, so prominent in American imagination and lore, became official Wednesday.

Is it really a requiem for the city we once knew and loved?
The reason the old New Orleans is dead is that the people who made it special are gone and there is no path for them to come back. I doubt there's anywhere else in this country you could find so many black people who look white or so many white people who sound black. I know there's nowhere else you could find all the Creoles and Cajuns, nowhere else you could hear that odd New Orleans accent that sounds more like Brooklyn than Biloxi.

8 Comments:

At 1/13/2006 05:37:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Incredibly sad, this. Sigh...

Mixter

 
At 1/13/2006 06:32:00 AM, Blogger Mr. Clio said...

This guy is, simply put, full of shit.

1. If people don't come back, it's not the Commission's fault. It's the NIMBY people's fault. It's the fault of Old Money New Orleans that has refused over decades to invest in black New Orleans. It's the fault of scratch-brother-in-law's back politicians (black and white, over MANY years) who make it hard to get things done.

2. We ain't dead yet. I find it offensive to hear him say that the people who make this place special aren't back. I'm here busting my ass. So are a lot of others.

3. What is this asshole's alternative? Build it back just as it was? He reminds me of the white guy from Lakeview who wants to just build his place back with his insurance money, no questions asked. With no plan in place, good luck getting insurance in the future, Mr. Big Stuff.

4. Thanks for the link, although the stress it causes my heart just took three years off my life.

 
At 1/13/2006 08:20:00 AM, Blogger Schroeder said...

Yeah, this is very sad.

I'm not a fan of Eugene Robinson's pieces on New Orleans. I don't think he really knows what he's talking about. The rhetorical flourishes suggest a very fine writer, but the defeatism kills me. I understand that the terminal imagery might shock some elected leaders into action (and I do a fair bit of it myself), but he's on the national stage. Could he be more critical in the specifics instead of just writing off the city as he's done over and over?

 
At 1/13/2006 08:25:00 AM, Blogger Schroeder said...

And, by the way, I was having a conversation a couple of days ago with someone who was recalling an interview with Bill Clinton. Clinton said that there's no question New Orleans will survive and be rebuilt -- it's really just a question of whether the United States government will be a part of the process and make of New Orleans a model for the future. Will the Bush administration and Congress stop pointing the finger at Louisianians to cover for their own incompetence and cronyism? Will they embrace the sort of optimism and courage that Clinton always displayed. Whether you like Clinton or not, it's impossible to argue that he wasn't one of the most intelligent presidents this nation has ever had, and that he was always able to take a difficult issue and sell to the American people an optimistic outcome. Bush on the other hand ... well, nothing more be said.

 
At 1/13/2006 10:50:00 AM, Blogger Schroeder said...

Thanks for the encouragement tara.

 
At 1/13/2006 10:51:00 AM, Blogger Schroeder said...

And tara, thanks for so courageously promoting the cause of rebuilding New Orleans.

 
At 1/13/2006 01:09:00 PM, Blogger Polimom said...

Eugene Robinson has always had a strong slant. Prior to the New Orleans writing, though, I've found him to be pretty good - even when I didn't agree.

This, combined with the other day (I got mad at him then, too), are a bit much, though.

Gonna have to pull him off my regular reading list, I believe.

 
At 1/16/2006 01:44:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

To paraphrase a line from Sam Kinison:

Much like a dog that's been fixed, Eugene don't get it.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home