Post by Tim S. McMahan on Feb 11, 2005 17:35:05 GMT -5
Never been to Boston so I can't say. I don't think that's the point the writer was trying to make in her piece.
Here's what she was saying about Omaha:
"...a spacious expanse of strip malls and parking lots, both so vast you’d swear they could house the entire population of China. The Red Staters tend to be so conservatively provincial, they wouldn’t know a double entendre if it licked them in the face. No one blinks at the name of local convenience-store chain Kum & Go; and when, more than a year ago, Omaha’s Chamber of Commerce tried to promote itself by adopting the simple symbol "O!", it was shocked when a local sex shop appropriated the symbol for a billboard. Also, Oberst is vegan, and his home town is all about dead animals: the land of the juicy steak once tried to market itself with the slogan 'Omaha: Rare, Well-Done,' and even the few hipster bars around have stuffed game heads mounted on the walls. But mostly, the problem with Omaha is that it behaves like a small town. 'There is only one good use for a small town,' Lou Reed once reasoned. 'You hate it and you’ll know you have to leave.'"
I have a feeling that, given a plane ticket and a couple hours, I could come up with a similar description of Boston (or any city for that matter).
boston isn't that cool. i've been there plenty enough to know that it's just as (even moreso) close-minded as omaha. everything that writer wrote about omaha could be found in the last 2 year's chamber of commerce brochures + the first desaperecidos album lyrics. i don't think the writer did too much research.