The City
“The” City. A recent post offered the term in a casual manner, with the statement that I had “convinced my wife to meet me in Queens Plaza after she got out of work in the city.” This started a bit of a debate in the comments section about the term which I haven’t been able…
“The” City.
A recent post offered the term in a casual manner, with the statement that I had “convinced my wife to meet me in Queens Plaza after she got out of work in the city.” This started a bit of a debate in the comments section about the term which I haven’t been able to stop considering. If you’re a native New Yorker, and by native I include the 5 Boroughs, as well as Nassau, Suffolk, White Plains, or eastern Jersey – you are likely to refer to Manhattan as “the City.” The outer reaches of commuter land might substitute “New York” for “the City.” Typical usage is “we had dinner in the city” or “went to a concert in the city” or “works in the city” and so on. I’ve been overly intrigued about this one, for some reason, and have engaged in conversation about it with several people from all walks on the usage of the term. Most everyone, from Elected Officials to my local bartender in Astoria, agree on “the City” as referring solely to Manhattan.
What’s kind of interesting is that the so called “new people,” those who have found their way here in the last twenty years or so from the vast wilds of North America, think that this is all crazy talk. They look at Brooklyn and Queens’s East River coast and ask “what is this, the country?” To the generation of New Yorkers who were around in the 1890s that left the crowded streets of Manhattan for greener pastures on Long Island, it actually was.
More after the jump…
Historically, Manhattan (and a section of the Bronx) alone was New York City until the consolidation of the City of Greater New York in 1898. That’s when Dick Croker and the Tammany boys pulled off a deal which brought the populous City of Brooklyn and the relatively rural communities of Staten Island and what we call Queens (they were mainly after Long Island City), as well as the northern reaches of the Bronx, into the five boroughs arrangement which would be familiar to any living New Yorker.
The consolidated City is the entity that built most of the bridges and tunnels, created the FDNY out of many smaller fire departments, and built a lot of our schools. The consolidated City is also the entity that began to export every dirty industry and ugly occupation from the island of Manhattan to the so called “outer boroughs” which is why if you flush a toilet below 79th street, the flow goes to Greenpoint’s Newtown Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant over in Brooklyn. Most of your recycling happens in Queens and the Bronx, as well. Staten Island has literally been treated like a garbage dump by “the City” and the worlds largest manmade object is found there – the former Fresh Kills landfill.
In the halcyon days of the Koch era, a derogatory term used by the Manhattanite night life cultural elites emerged which described Queensicans, Brooklynites, Staten Islanders, and the masses of suburbanites as “bridge and tunnel.” It was meant to indicate a dross lack of sophistication, point out various class differences, and it was not something you wanted to be called. Queens, in particular, was considered to be rather coarse and full of “Archie Bunkers” (a reference to the popular character from the “All in the Family” television show). As a young artist growing up in Brooklyn, my singular desire was to live in Manhattan, and my Mom would tell her friends that “he wants to be a bum in the Village.” How things have changed.
That’s the way things were, until the so called “Brooklyn Renaissance” began in the 1990’s, and the western coast of Long Island suddenly gained its modern cache when the “cool kids” began to move there from the Lower East Side, via the Williamsburg Bridge.
I’ve always ascribed to the concept of the “Megalopolis” myself. The Megalopolis has Manhattan as the dense center of a vast urban complex that stretches from Boston to Washington, wherein every location’s importance is measured by how far it is from “the City.” Having driven extensively around New England and the Mid Atlantic states over the years – I can tell you that as far as 400 miles away – highway signs begin to say “New York” with an arrow pointing the way.
One of my little aphorisms is actually “All roads in the United States ultimately lead to New York City, and specifically to Manhattan.”
Using the reasoning that many of the “new people” offer, that “the City” is in fact the entire core of the Big Apple and not just Manhattan island, we’d have to incorporate Newark, Hoboken, Jersey City, Yonkers, and the southern reaches of White Plains and Connecticut into the arrangement. This is probably something that the Tammany crew would have eventually gotten around to if the Roosevelts hadn’t cut them off at the knees back in the early 20th century, but there you go.
I’d really like to hear a bit more from y’all on this subject, about “The City” and what that term means for you. There’s invisible cultural borders all around us. A certain section of New Jersey is where a sandwich called the “Sloppy Joe” stops being ground meat with tomato sauce and starts being a turkey, cole slaw, and russian dressing affair, and there’s a place upstate where hero sandwiches first become “Subs” and then transmogrify into “Grinders” in the Albany area, for instance.
Newtown Creek Alliance Historian Mitch Waxman lives in Astoria and blogs at Newtown Pentacle.
“The city” is a vague term. If you’re in the outer boroughs, it usually means Manhattan. However, it’s vague–you still live “in the city” if you live in Brooklyn or Queens or the Bronx, but you might also go “into the city” for work, meaning Manhattan. “The city” definitely doesn’t include Jersey City, Hoboken, etc., and it only rarely includes Staten Island.
Growing up in Queens in the 1960s + early 70S, Manhattan was referred to as town, as in he works in town or I am going into town for dinner. The five boroughs were the city. Whenever I was outside NYC, I said I was from the city and no one ever asked which city. Within the city, when someone asked, I said I was from Queens.
Actually, anonymous, no. And if it were that stupid you wouldn’t be commenting.
It started by me gently chiding Mitch about his calling Manhattan the “city,” shortly after he wrote how he hates referring to the QB Bridge as the Ed Koch Bridge. Considering that semantics matter to Mitch, and I know he loves Queens, then I felt he should feel similarly. To be clear, I am a big fan of Mitch’s and do not take any of this nonsense seriously.
I lived my entire 36-yrs in Queens. So using Mitch’s terminology, I suppose I am one of the “old people.” I do not dispute that many people who grew up in a borough other than Manhattan refer to it as the “city.” But like mememe, I thought that was dumb. Believe it or not, the majority isn’t always right. People are echo chambers; that doesn’t really add to the discussion.
My point, again, is simple: Manhattan may get the most attention, but it only represents a fraction of what makes the city what it is. There are many people from Manhattan with superiority complexes who love when insecure “outer borough” residents refer to their island as if it were NYC proper. Calling Manhattan the “city” implicitly suggests that the other boroughs are somehow not the “city.” That’s not only wrong in the obvious, legal sense (otherwise this debate would be over quickly, and my “side” would have won easily), but it’s also wrong in the intangible, emotional sense as well. I would never say Queens is better than Manhattan in any way, but I sure as hell won’t say the opposite either. Each borough has its own unique charms and its own claims for what makes it an essential part of NYC.
Now, to really belabor this, there’s the other issue of suburban vs. urban neighborhoods. I grew up in Woodside, in a graffiti writing/hip hop listening/subway riding/friends-of-all-ethnicities having/rooftop & fire escape chilling/basketball & handball playing etc. environment. Nothing about this suggests any less urbanism than Manhattan. Indeed, I went to high school in the Bronx and had many Manhattan classmates. Many of them seemed more sheltered and less “city-like” than those from other boroughs. This partly had to do with the fact that they tended to stay within the same 30-block radius their whole lives while others like me enjoyed traveling around the city and seeing different neighborhoods.
If you respect all of the boroughs, refer to Manhattan as Manhattan. If not, keep on calling that borough the “city.” And I will continue to say “which city?” when my wife says it just to fuck with her.
Considering that developers are trying to market Queens to corny outsiders now in the same way they’ve done with Brooklyn, perhaps the joke’s on me. I don’t really want them here, so perhaps letting them continue to think that Queens is the sticks inures to my benefit.
Don’t worry, TimesUp, I was commenting on the semantic arguments, not the self-esteem argument you’re pressing. People may disagree as to whether terms like “‘sup” degrade the English language, and therefore whether people — particularly those who care about good grammar — ought to refrain from such vulgarities. But, my tendencies aside, I take no position whether anyone ought to say Manhattan as opposed to the City. My point remains that it is stupid to argue against its usage on a technicality when its meaning is well understood.
It’s not a “semantic argument” or a “technicality” to argue against people who refer to “the city” as consisting of only Manhattan. Instead, it is simply pointing out that the people who use “the city” this way are making a factually incorrect statement. The city has 5 boroughs, not just one. So trying to get people to not make false statements about the city is not “stupid”. It is just trying to get people to recognize that they have no factual basis for making such a statement about “the city”.
Just because some people may have been using the term “the city” in this way for a long time doesn’t make that statement a true statement.
As a person growing up in queens, all my family & friends refer as the City. Manhattan is only a term used in the textbook or to friends from other states. We never consider Brooklyn queens as the city. Maybe different neighborhoods have different lingo.
Interesting opinion. Born and raised in Queens. I’ve always referred to “the City” as Manhattan, like all my friends did while growing up. When people ask me where I’m from, I say “the City”. Anyone from the 5 boroughs is from “the City”. The surrounding suburbs are a different story.
No, no and no. No one from Queens has ever called Manhattan anything but the city. Mitch’s usage references are spot on exactly what we say. — Queens born and raised (and no spring chicken)
This is a stupid argument. Mitch made reference to “the City” and everyone knew exactly what he meant. Nobody asked, “which city, Cleveland, Rome?” The purpose of language fulfilled, he got across his point. Instead folks quibbled with overly semantic and technical arguments as to whether the term makes sense.
I suspect these people might suggest Mitch call a doctor when he calls his lay-up “sick” or remark on his cousin’s exuberance when referred to as “gay.” Sorry, y’all, but you out yourself as a “tool” when you quibble, and I don’t mean like a hammer.
I’m with you Mitch, and happy I get to leave the city early tonight to celebrate the New Year in Queens.