memebag

I'm not exactly sure, either. I'm don't think I'm articulating my opposition properly. Are the sidewalks between the 3 blocks still there? If so, will they be public or private space? Parks are still public space. I once read that the original plan for Philadelphia and some other early east coast cities resembled checkerboards, with alternating squares of public and private space.

I thought that, too, at first. But replacing 3 blocks (and the public space between them) with a shopping mall (entirely private space) isn't just a shopping mall in downtown. I see people here who are excited about it because it will be like downtown, but better. It will be cleaner, safer, denser, happier, something. It's not as blatant as Sugar Land's Town Center, but it's part of the same movement. They are replacing public space with private space. They are building a downtown ride. You can (legally) take photographs from public sidewalks. You can't inside malls. People have no right to "peaceably assemble" in a shopping mall.

You're welcome, dbigtex56. That Wikipedia page contains a line that's relevant to the Houston Pavilions:

Pomo has been dead since 1996. And that pose is out too, Sunny Jim. The new thing is to care passionately and be right wing.

I'll take Dick over Baudrillard any day. (That's Philip K. Dick, not the other kind.) He saw Disneyland as one of the most frightening places on earth. Your America might be the map, but mine is still America. Don't eat the menu.

Why not just keep sending them to River Oaks?

How much would it cost to fit all of them with those shock collars used to train dogs and give every homeowner a remote? Seriously, what do you mean by "controls"?

Hacker challenge: Be the first on your block to turn the windows at 2727 Kirby into a scrolling banner by controlling the curtains and lights in each room.

My problem is the replacement of life by simulacra. House of Blues is a perfect example, and Houston Pavilions will be another. Phil's being replaced by 59 Diner is probably the canonical example. Did you ever eat at Phil's? What's a more rewarding experience: playing Guitar Hero 3, or playing a guitar? Just about anything that wasn't an inside-out mall, I guess. Quit developing, I suppose, maybe get a job providing a more direct service? I'm no expert on developers. I don't like the tenants, but that isn't really what I'm saying. No, everything new isn't automatically artificial. New things that try to look like old things are artificial. Things that mediate direct experience, that mimic things they aren't, that "give the impression of an urban city", those new things are artificial. Cool. Maybe "BACK IN BLACK" will play there. They're an AC/DC tribute band playing the HOB in Dallas. It's probably as good as the real thing.

Paving over a Civil War battlefield to build a Disney Civil War ride doesn't make the ride less artificial. It makes it more insulting and depressing, but not more "real". Likewise, building a House of Blues in 'the most "urban" district of Houston' (why the quotes?) doesn't make that House of Blues anything more than a chain restaurant selling a sanitized imitation of an actual blues bar experience. I'd much rather go to Palace Lanes than Lucky Strike because Palace Lanes is an actual bowling alley, built just for bowling, not for kooky kitschy hipness. Irony and bowling just don't mix. I accept that it doesn't come off that way to you, but I just looked at their web site and I can guarantee it would to me. How can any development containing a Hard Rock Cafe do otherwise? Don't get me wrong. I love going to amusement parks and carnivals to ride the rides. I just don't want my world replaced by them.

It's all becoming clear to me. This is another Disney ride, but instead of giving the impression that you're sailing with pirates or in a haunted house, it makes you feel like you're in an "urban city". Like House of Blues gives the impression that you're eating authentic soul food and listening to down-home blues, but with only simulated danger and lots of safety equipment and ride operators. This won't be a real experience, but a carefully controlled simulation.

I disagree. Everytime I go downtown at night I'm shocked by the large number of people and open businesses compared to how it was in the 80s and 90s. Back then it might have seemed empty, but tt was actually occupied by skaters. That probably isn't the sort of "urban"-ness you're looking for, but it was a deeply urban experience for anyone who participated.

I just don't think "pockets" of density can survive without some pressure to maintain them. Houston's suburbs will continue to drain people as they age, build families, and get tired of drunken suburbanites pissing on their sidewalks. I speak from experience on that (I followed the Gay Trail from Montrose to the Heights to Westbury). I with the Pavilions luck, but I don't think they will be able to change the nature of Houston and its citizens. I don't think the desire to live in a densely populated area or nice stores or pretty architecture are enough to really increase population density in the long run.

But what do you mean by "more urban"? What scale are you using?

Then let's not talk.

It sounds nice, I just don't think it will work. Without natural barriers to confine sprawl and cheap private transportation, there aren't enough incentives to maintain high density. I don't know. I think Houston attracts people who don't want high density residences and good public transportation, people who enjoy a yard with a fence and sitting alone in their car for a couple of hours each day with the AC at full blast. My gut tells me the love of the private automobile is so deep we'll always figure out a way to keep them. If I really wanted to live in a pedestrian friendly city, I know of several good ones I could move to.

My last mosquito bite was about 3 weeks ago. Are you constantly covered with petrochemical by-products? Who's wallowing in their own filth? The people who walk about and breathe all that benzene?

Refreshing honesty, I suppose. There's something disgusting about a city built in a mosquito infested swamp for the purpose of refining and distributing petroleum products trying to present itself as a green oasis of foot friendliness.

I was responding to C2H's statement about mixing teens and adults "to give the impression of an urban city". That sounds like C2H is more interested in how Houston looks to outsiders than how Houston functions. It also raises the question of what makes a city an "urban city". I'm a big fan of organic, distributed, chaotic systems. Central planning, long term vision, and all that jazz bums me out. I love pedestrian friendly cities, but I don't think Houston will be one as long as private transportation is within the budget of the average citizen. I have a perverse fondness for the 80s downtown landscape that seemed designed to threaten pedestrians, as if one could easily be electrocuted for stepping out of your car.

If anyone hasn't seen it, I recommend The Year of the Yao. It was on IFC or Sundance a couple of months ago, and it was fascinating. They filmed Yao and his translator throughout Yao's first year on the Rockets. Turns out Yao is very big in China.

That sentence sums up a lot of my distaste for these developments. Are we trying to make believe that Houston is an "urban city"? Is this all just a game of dress-up? If Houston isn't an "urban city", then what is it? And why should it try to give that impression?

Where can one find a map of these borders? All of this Uptown/Midtown/East End nomenclature is unclear to me (and I've lived here for over 40 years).

Not too long after the Angelika opened, they were the only theater in town showing the restored print of "Citizen Kane". That's my favorite movie. I've seen it at least a hundred times. I was very excited. I went on opening day. They showed it at the wrong aspect ratio. It's Academy -- they showed it at 1.85:1. I asked the manager to fix it and he told me that was impossible. He said that they didn't have the right lens (which was a lie, since they were using a spherical lens) and that there wasn't a theater in the entire southwest that could show a film in Academy aspect ratio. I tried to explain how he could reframe the image, but it was clear that he wasn't going to do anything. If you're going to be an art house, don't butcher the movies. I hate the Angelika. There are some sins that can never be forgiven.

Any "Illuminatus!" fans out there? 23, 17 and 5 were all significant numbers in that trilogy. And this thing is being built at 1717 Bissonnet.

More importantly, which nation's military??