I can’t believe John Vorwald wrote a lament about how much the Lower East Side has changed… SINCE 2003. Oh, fine. God bless, honey. I do remember when I first moved here and I used to take the J into Manhattan to Essex and Delancey and then would sort of run-walk up to the East Village with my head down. I mean, it wasn’t exactly the 1970s but we also didn’t leave the house without a weapon. (Legal: very short knives. Not legal but useful: stun guns.) Related: I have got to get the fuck out of New York City. Also: I am old.
Update: I didn’t mean to sound too harsh, by the way. I mean, this piece actually is funny, particularly coming from a Canadian. But I do think there’s some confusions in it, not least have to do with historical timeframes. For instance: I don’t think that it’s the Lilly Pulitzer set that is truly frequenting the LES now. Who wears Lilly below 53rd Street or north of Royal Poinciana Way or whilst not on a boat? (I hope: no one, or what’s the point of owning Lilly Pulitzer?) The point of being someone who wears Lilly Pulitzer is that you don’t want to be seen slumming. That is largely true for J. Press boys. Besides in my apartment, I’ve never seen an item of J. Press in New York City south of Grand Central. (Though I have also never worked in a Wall Street-adjacent office on a summer Friday, so there’s that. Also one hopes I never will.) I think also that the people who were in the Meatpacking District eight years ago (and their slightly-younger emulators) are the people who are on the Lower East Side now—as Vorwald points out, to his credit!—and they are wearing something much more form-fitting and spiky than preppy. But like I said, he’s Canadian, and heterosexual to boot, and I seriously don’t expect him to understand the ridiculously finer distinctions—Bill Cunningham levels of finer—regarding apparel and station and presentation. Related: I am also still old.
