I was briefly back on the homefront earlier this month to check out the now fully opened Big Four Bridge pedestrian path across the Ohio River in Louisville. While there I spent some time in NuLu, a retail and restaurant district centered on Market St. just east of downtown, and had dinner at a French bistro type place called La Coop. This place focuses on what I’d call the basics – it’s not trying to be a super high end kind of place. But I’m not going to lie, the undistinguished frites aside, the meal was spectacular front to back, and my date agreed.
Louisville is known for its many high quality restaurants. I doubt La Coop is tops on many people’s list, nor does it aspire to be. Yet preparing to drive back to Indy I was struck that La Coop is better than any restaurant in Indianapolis. My meal at La Coop was probably better than any one I’d had in Indy since L’Explorateur closed in 2009. And that’s a not uncommon occurrence when dining in Louisville. What’s more, La Coop was bustling by 8pm on a Tuesday night. While tables were certainly available, you can’t assume you can just walk in to a top restaurant there without a reservation, even on a weeknight.
Louisville clearly values fine dining in a way that Indianapolis doesn’t. Metro Indy is larger, better educated, richer, and much less provincial. Given that amenities generally fall along a size-wealth slope, by default you’d think Indy would do better on the restaurant front. But it doesn’t. Why is this?
Louisville clearly punches above its weight on restaurants. Part of this is due to the presence of a major culinary school. But that doesn’t explain the demand side of the equation. What does?
I see this as resulting at least in part from a cultural divide between the Midwest and the South, which seems to fall somewhere between these two cities. I argue the stronger aristocratic heritage of the South creates the conditions in which excellence is encouraged (or at least respected), versus the leveling democratic social state of the Midwest that anathematizes any distinctions between high and low and thus creates a climate in which excellence is disparaged (or distrusted at best).
Tocqueville is of course the best writer on the differences between aristocracy and democracy. Of aristocratic heritage himself, he recognized the overall superiority of the democratic state in uplifting the common man. The average condition in a democratic social state he would note, is higher than that of an aristocracy. He also saw clearly the many flaws of the aristocratic state. Yet he also realized that with the passing of aristocracy, things would be lost, especially in the realm of fine arts and refinement more broadly construed.
Tocqueville (among others) noted that the South was the most aristocratic region of the United States. That doesn’t mean he approved. In fact, he was not a fan of the US South, and wrote of its many manifest flaws, including the injustice of slavery and the many pernicious effects it had on the character of whites as well.
One of traits of aristocracy that seems to remain present in the South is the existence and embrace of an aristocratic class or caste. In many cases this is family based, such that, for example, you could never become fully part of the elite of Charleston as an outsider no matter how much money, talent, or class you have. But carpetbaggers and the nouveau riche are able to assimilate to some degree.
As with a feudal landholding, this aristocratic class exists as part of an integrated system with the lower classes. Thus the lower classes not only recognize the rights of aristocratic class to homage and such, the elites can even be a source of pride to ordinary residents of the community.
In this system, the upper class can cultivate high end tastes without incurring the opprobrium of the community. They are literally a class apart and are expected to depart from the average resident in terms of tastes and manners.
We see this clearly in the case of the so-called “Millionaire’s Row” at the Kentucky Derby. Actually, many Louisville locals never even attend the Kentucky Derby, instead attending the Kentucky Oaks, which is held the day before and is known as the race for the locals. (The Oaks itself attracts over 100,000 attendees). Most of them will certainly never visit the Derby’s more elite precincts. Yet, seeing the presence of celebrities and local elites in their finery on TV doesn’t produce resentment, but rather pride. The conspicuous consumption and lavish traditions of elite Louisville are something the average resident sees as reflecting well on their community as a whole, and hence to some extent even on themselves.
In terms of how this affects restaurants, Louisville’s elite can patronize high quality, high status establishments without shame. There is nothing seen as wrong in the community with them pursuing aristocratic tastes. Again, the high quality of Louisville’s restaurants can be a source of pride even to those who don’t patronize them. There are, of course, class tensions in Louisville such as the East End-South End divide. But class conflict itself implies multiple classes of people.
The situation is totally different in Indianapolis. In Indiana, the idea of an aristocratic type class would be viewed with hostility. There’s a democratic social state norm in which anyone who is viewed as too uppity is seen as having a moral defect. There’s only supposed to be one class of people. This has its virtues, but has debilitating effects as well. Take for example the classic line “He might have book learning but he doesn’t have any common sense.” You literally hear this in Indiana. But the moral system underpinning it clearly explains why education is held in such low regard in the Midwest. It’s not just that education as such is viewed as not worth it; the pursuit of education indicates a type of moral deficiency.
So take a look at the traditions of the Indianapolis 500. Obviously US auto racing has a different culture than horse racing. But it still aligns with the social state. The 500 is a classic everyman’s type event, with a blue collar ethos, in which actual attendance by locals plays a major role. There are some celebrities of course, but celebrity/elite culture plays a very limited role there in contrast to the Kentucky Derby and certainly than international auto racing such as Formula 1. (The biggest personalities at the 500 are those with a particularly local traditional appeal – like Jim Nabors and Florence Henderson – versus contemporary celebrity star power).
This bleeds through into nearly every aspect of the civic culture in the state. I’ve long noted that there’s no culture of connoisseurship in Indianapolis. This is true for pretty much everything. Restaurants are but one example. While much better on average than they used to be, and certainly not bad by any means, Indy’s restaurants don’t measure up to Louisville’s with the notable exception of breakfast places. As the case with the aforementioned L’Exporateur shows, when Indy chefs do decide to put out a world class product, it isn’t patronized because it isn’t valued. It’s not about culinary talent, it’s about the customer base or lack thereof. The chef behind L’Ex opened a pizza place next. It should be no surprise that Indianapolis Monthly once had a cover story dubbing the city “Chain City, USA.”
My understanding is that there is a group of hardcore food and wine folks in Indy, but they do most of their consumption at private dinners and out of their private cellars. Public displays of refinement or luxurious consumption in Indianapolis are simply not acceptable.
This is but one example of how the pursuit of excellence in all varieties is disparaged and subject to active suppression in the state. This is hardly limited to Indiana and is a near universal Midwestern trait from what I’ve seen. Chicago offers the major exception, and I’ll exclude Minnesota as well for now since I don’t fully grok the culture there.
It’s been said pejoratively that “Indiana is the ‘middle finger of the South’ sticking into the Midwest.” And while it’s true that parts of Southern Indiana such as my hometown, being in Louisville’s orbit, have a heavy Southern influence, the state is not Southern in my view. It’s very different culturally and here we have one example. I easily see the same dynamic that exists in Indiana to various degrees in Illinois, Ohio, Wisconsin, and Michigan.
That this is a cultural value is most clearly seen in the exceptions that prove the rule, like Columbus, Indiana. Columbus is by far the most successful small industrial city in the state, and home to a world-renowned collection of modern architecture among other distinctives. In a major essay on that city, I noted that “in Columbus, excellence is not a byword.” This was perhaps imposed externally by local business magnate J. Irwin Miller, but appears to have been stamped to some degree on the character of the community. As local business owner Tony Moravec put it, “We do things first class here.” Whether the value will be retained or dissipate now that Miller is dead remains to be seen, but it’s still there for now.
But in a state replete with struggling communities, has anyplace ever looked to imitate Columbus? Has it been held up as a model? No. Why not? It’s because Indiana as a whole rejects the values that made Columbus successful. J. Irwin Miller famously said that “a mediocrity is expensive.” True, but that misses the point re:Indiana. Mediocrity isn’t an economic value in the state. It’s a moral value. People aren’t choosing mediocrity in the mistaken belief that it’s cheap. They think aspiring to better is a character defect. That sacralization of average is why many of its communities are willing to martyr themselves in its honor. And if a place tries to aspire to better, don’t worry. The General Assembly will soon be introducing legislation to make sure that doesn’t spread.
This produces an enormous cultural headwind that is an impediment to even the cultural elite in their attempts to create high quality things, from good architecture to good restaurants. The attempts are compromised both via the internalization of this value, and external forces expressing it. As Paul Graham put it:
How much does it matter what message a city sends? Empirically, the answer seems to be: a lot. You might think that if you had enough strength of mind to do great things, you’d be able to transcend your environment. Where you live should make at most a couple percent difference. But if you look at the historical evidence, it seems to matter more than that.
The restaurants of Indianapolis are well beyond mediocre, but they have clearly been affected by this characteristic of the social state in which they are operating.
One exception to this rule about the pursuit of excellence is in sports, and it’s a telling one. Hoosiers and Midwesterners want to see their teams win, but they want to see them win the right way and with the right kind of people that reflect the character of the state’s residents. In the South they just want wins and they don’t care how they get them.
Do you think anybody in Kentucky cares about the Calipari Way as long as UK is racking up wins and championships? Is it any surprise that it’s North Carolina where athletes get A’s in fake classes? Nobody cares in the South as long the wins come and behavior doesn’t get so bad it brings national publicity.
By contrast, Big Ten schools by and large expect their players to get an education and graduate, to demonstrate good character, and there’s a lifelong commitment and bond between coaches, fans, and players. When IU tried to import a UK style into its program with the Kelvin Sampson hire, the fanbase rejected it almost immediately. (By the way, I’ll never consider Penn State a Big Ten school, and Pennsylvania is not the Midwest). It’s similar in the way that the brawl era Pacers saw their fan support vaporize.
In Indiana particularly, from Milan High School to Steve Alford’s Indiana Hoosiers, the self-effacing, fundamentally sound, clean cut, small town type of player and team had big success. (Oscar Robertson was a player in the same mold. Though he never got his due at the time thanks to racism, he shows that even black Indiana players exhibited the same character traits). This perhaps convinced Hoosiers that their preferred style of doing things would bring success as well.
Unfortunately that hasn’t played out much recently, either in sports or economically. This produces cognitive dissonance and a sense of bitterness about a world that seems to have gone wrong. As I wrote re:Columbus and about how that city’s embrace of excellence paid economic rewards in a world where cheap places to do business are a dime a dozen:
It isn’t just something that affects architecture….This is a place with high standards for itself. This pays huge dividends in the economic development sphere. In a competitive world, only firms that deliver excellence can survive the brutal global competition. Which workers are more likely to produce excellent products, ones that demand excellence in their own communities, or ones who disparage it? How can any investor believe that residents who tolerate a run down, mediocre community for their own family to live in will suddenly start taking pride in the products coming off their employers’ production lines? It makes no sense at all.
I’m not sure the Midwest understands this lesson, or would take heed of it if it did. Rather there is, I detect, a martyrdom complex. People in the Midwest believe they are entitled to success the way they used to enjoy it because they live the right way. But if they don’t get it, at least their communities can die with their values intact. If this is in fact the case, it’s impossible to gainsay the decision. It’s even admirable in a sense. I myself would never adopt the values of UK basketball no matter how many championships it would bring. But then again I’m a Hoosier so of course I feel that way.
In any case, as Richard Longworth put it in his book about the failures of the Midwest in the age of globalization, “The first task is to tell the truth.” Simply stating the obvious truth that Louisville has better restaurants than Indy may generate blowback. But the larger and more painful truth is that Indiana and the Midwest have embraced mediocrity as a value in a way that hobbles the pursuit of excellence there, and has terrible economic and other consequences that go far beyond restaurants. Unless and until that truth is faced and things change, which may require something like an influx of outsiders not wedded to the status quo, the enormous potential of this region and its people will continue to be squandered.
I grew up near one of Indiana’s smaller communities and I’ve since lived in Fort Wayne and Indianapolis, with a six-year stint in Los Angeles mixed in for good measure. I think you’ve hit at the heart of the matter, Aaron. Our whole culture is engrained in our DNA, and it’s holding us back.
I’ve always thought Hoosiers are good people with generally good intentions but not noted for harboring aspirations of greatness (with notable exceptions such as Indy’s sports endeavors, that included building a stadium without a team, or the new Indy airport). It confounds me that we seem to take such pride in these successes but then completely fail to apply that thinking to other, often more pressing, matters.
We hear a lot of bragging about our conservative fiscal chops, which is certainly admirable, but we seldom hear our leaders (or average citizens) pushing for investment in the things that would make our communities better and, thus, more competitive. It’s not just about tax rates and frugal government. It’s also about vision and global competition. It’s about return on investment. The old saying that sometimes you’ve gotta spend money to make money is worth taking to heart. As you said, how can we attract outside investment if we seem OK with living in mediocre surroundings, if we don’t demand something better?
Indy is somewhat an outlier in this regard, and I think that explains a lot of the anti-Indy hubris across the state. You need look no further than the state legislature to see that dynamic in action. But even Indy can’t overcome some of the Midwest ethos issues you mentioned, with our restaurant scene just one example.
I was encouraged that there was some controversy over Indiana’s new, yet outdated state tourism motto: Honest to Goodness. Unfortunately, I believe there’s a more apt motto to describe our state: Good enough.
I have yet to find a restaurant/meat market/beer/wine store outside of Indy that comes close to matching Goose the Market, one of the few not so hidden gems worth stopping at when traveling through Indy.
Other favorites, Barcelona Tapas (featured on Indy tourism ad) and The Tamale Place, Rockville Rd.
We just returned to Indianapolis after a weekend visit to Kalamazoo, MI. IMO, the restaurant scene there puts Indy’s to shame. Instead of hotel and chain restaurants, it was independent restaurant, brewpub, and bistro left and right.
I won’t attempt an interpretation, a la Aaron, but just add this as an example.
Is some of this lack of awareness? I have some well-traveled friends who certainly know good food and wine, and they don’t typically complain about the restaurant scene in Indy. Indy’s independent restaurant gems are typically hidden away. Or, perhaps as Aaron notes, perceived as fairly high-class and hence something for special occasions only.
—
While reading the first part of this article, I was going to put the north-south cultural divide between Columbus and Seymour. That kind of messes up the “middle finger of the south” argument, though the “hills and hollers” of southern Indiana are, well, Southern. But more Appalachian, similar to Eastern Ohio…settled early by Germans and some English, Scots, and Irish coming down the Ohio River from Pittsburgh or up from Kentucky.
When I grew up in Louisville, it was regularly said the the river was the key to the culture rather than being southern. The reason was always having different people passing through.
Your description applies perfectly to Omaha, which is triple-distilled Midwestern. Sameness and total conformity is openly proclaimed as a virtual civic religion. Distinguishing yourself in any way is instantly and openly suspect. Omaha, is economically prosperous today and has almost unlimited space, but the one guaranteed conversation starter is parking. It provides a way for omahans to remind each other how important it is to be exactly like each other. I witnessed dozens of conversations about the evils of improper parking, among close friends and strangers alike. The whole experience of life was soul-crushing.
on another note, what examples of “excellence” do you see in Columbus? To me, Columbus is a Midwestern town at heart, even if it has a more diverse population by geographic origin than Indy. It’s culinary scene is far less than Cincinnati’s for example.
I think the central premise here is 5 years old. Back in 2009, yes, Louisville was hands-down better. But in the meantime, the following very-good-to-extremely-good independent restaurants have opened in Indy: Recess, Bluebeard, Black Market, Cerulean, Delicia, Late Harvest Kitchen, Plow & Anchor, 10-01, Shoefly Public House, Thunderbird, and on and on….
Does the balance still tip toward Louisville? Likely. But I’m not sure it’s so dramatic as to be worth an entire thesis on the topic.
Matthew, I’m not going to let this become another Cincinnati vs. Columbus thread. The Columbus I’m referring to in the article is the one in Indiana, not Ohio.
I think you’ll observe from my series on Columbus, Ohio that I noted its lack of distinctives. And noted the OSU football impact on the culture perhaps similar to that of basketball in Indiana.
Cincinnati is an interesting case. The river cities have an aristocratic heritage all their own. Much of its uniqueness is not necessarily excellence, however, e.g., Cincinnati style chili.
I’m a believer that cultural differences persist over time–you could point to Charleston as a simulacrum for much of what is right and wrong about the South–but this may be a bridge too far.
First, Louisville is in greater Appalachia and is much more influenced by clanish Scots/Irish tribalism that’s as different from Deep South aristocracy as it is from Northeast Yankeedom. Beyond that, I think acceptance of mediocrity is a defining characteristic of the South. There’s lots of great old stuff there, but its legacy stuff. Charleston and legacy sites like it stand out because the background is Pole barns and Applebees.
@Chris Corr, you shouldn’t assume that other cities’ dining scenes have stagnated while Indy’s improved. The food scene is much better everywhere in 2009.
I’m not going to review individual places in Indy, but can say confidently that a great many highly touted Indy restaurants are very over-rated by the standards of cities around the country.
historian Davispd Hackett-Fischer wrote a huge history of the historical origins of the regional cultural differences Aaron describes. It’s called Albion’s Seed.
Aaron, Cincinnati’s Vine St. Gateway Quarter is essentially a local restaurant incubator with the more successful restaurateurs opening up spinoff restaurants. Not to mention Jeff Ruby’s, Jean Robert’s Table, La Poste, Nicolas, Boca, Sotto, Nada, Metropole, on and on. All it takes to have a good restaurant scene are locals open to spending a few more bucks to try something different. Skyline is comparable to White Castle.
@Eric, definitely the average condition in the South is poor. That too is a characteristic of aristocracy. I’m not arguing it’s superior on the whole.
Aaron, it was not clear that you meant Columbus ,Indiana at all. I’m certainly not referring to chili or any chain restaurants in Cincinnati or elsewhere. In my view, they don’t ‘count.’
Glen is right on here.
I was raised with Hoosier values in mind – particularly ones regarding money, such as fiscal conservatism in government and proud frugality in one’s personal life.
After post-grad travels, I’ve moved back to Indy as a young professional and can see how this approach hamstrings the city. Investment (aka spending money) to improve quality of life is just not something Hoosiers generally approve of.
Its shocking the difference you see between Indy and other cities in this regard. Indy residents truly have a low expectation of what a city can and should provide; its sad that most residents here don’t demand better.
Aaron, you are so correct on this. I have friends from out of state who take any chance they can to bash indiana, even though generally their home states have much more obvious flunders, and I have never really been able to articulate why Indiana suffers. And so the question arises, how do those that are interested fix that?
It was alluded to in the article, and in the comments, that maybe the state legislature is getting too big for its britches, even in the red state that is Indiana. And I think that sort of mindset can and should be applied to Indiana and other regions as well.
I don’t know about this pop-sociology, Aaron.
“The conspicuous consumption and lavish traditions of elite Louisville are something the average resident sees as reflecting well on their community as a whole, and hence to some extent even on themselves.”
And you base this on what? Your anecdotal experience, I suppose, just like everything else in this post. There is, undoubtedly, a big cultural difference between Indianapolis and Louisville. That’s obvious to anyone who has spent any time in both cities. Still, you essentially are taking two distinctions (Louisville has better restaurants and the Derby is fancier than the 500) to draw grand conclusions about two vast regions of the country. One particular issue that I have to take with your post is with the notion of Louisville as a stand in for the entire South. The Kentucky Derby basically is a historical anachronism and horse racing is not particularly popular anywhere else in the south outside of Kentucky as far as I can tell. Yet, somehow the Derby becomes a stand-in for southern culture. Well, how do you account for NASCAR, which is immensely more popular in the south than horse racing, yet in terms of aristrocracy makes the Indy 500 look like the Monaco Grand Prix.
Your sports discussion is pretty half-baked as well. Look, I love IU and the Big Ten, and the SEC undoubtedly has a corrupt history, but you are way overselling the Big Ten’s ethics. Even setting aside Penn State, Ohio State’s traditional football culture and disregard of academics for its athletes is legendary. Michigan, the most prestigious public university in the conference, had one of the worst pay-for-play scandals in the history of college athletics in the late 1990s. Minnesota, at the same time, had an academic scandal that wiped the school’s only Final Four appearance off the books. Illinois has had multiple corruption scandals over the years in both sports. Is it a surprise that UNC is in the midst of an academic scandal? Yes. UNC’s historical record and reputation are about 180 degrees from Kentucky’s. And I think you are mis-remembering the Kelvin Sampson era at IU. While lots of fans had misgivings about his hiring and a slim minority of fans walked away from the program entirely, for the most part (based upon attendance, a lack of booing from the stands, supportive chants, the T-shirts emulating the blue shirt and red tie Sampson wore at every game) he was given the benefit of the doubt until the very end, when it became impossible to do so.
And speaking of the Big Ten, if loathing of excellence is so ingrained and long-standing in midwestern culture, then how in the world did we end up with such an excellent network of public universities? (Also, Louisville is a stand in for the south, then why are UK and Louisville so historically mediocre academically? Where are the great public universities of the deep south, i.e. not counting UNC, UVA, or Texas? There certainly was no lack of arisocracy in Mississippi and Alabama). Look, I’m not saying that there isn’t a grain of truth to your description about the midwest, but I tend to think that it has much more to do with a disoriented response to the collapse of the manufacturing economy than with something that is ingrained. But then I read grandiose statements like this:
“But the moral system underpinning it clearly explains why education is held in such low regard in the Midwest. It’s not just that education as such is viewed as not worth it; the pursuit of education indicates a type of moral deficiency.”
I’ve lived in the midwest for my entire life and Indiana for the vast majority of time. I’ve lived in Indianapolis, Bloomington, a couple of mid-sized manufacturing cities along the lines of South Bend, and in a rural county seat town of 5,000. I always was a good student and a bookish sort of personality, and I ended up with degrees from a flagship Big Ten school and a top 20 private university. I took some occasional although typically not oppressive teasing from other kids (are we to believe that nerds aren’t teased in Boston and San Francisco?), but I literally cannot think of a single adult in my life who ever suggested that academic excellence was not an admirable pursuit. Not one. Again, I’m not disputing the basic premise that academic excellence is more valued in other parts of the country, but I think most of this post is gross exaggeration and generalization.
The Grand Rapids/Holland area is home to many many better restaurants that does Indianapolis. Carmel is notorious for having a dearth of excellent restaurants. Yes, we do readily accept mediocrity, in many things, not just restaurants.
Hoosierism, and I hear it all of the time – “Well, it could be worse.”
And, the lack of quality local art (thanks to nonexistent patronage, all good artists have to leave Indianapolis) for a city of Indianapolis’ size speaks volumes, as well.
John M, I have to disagree with you here. I once would’ve agreed with you, but moving around completely changed my perspective on this. I think being a lifelong resident of Indiana puts you too close to the situation. You can’t see the forest for the trees. Mediocrity is indeed a moral/cultural value in the Midwest, and it goes far beyond restaurants.
Look for example at city infrastructure. Why do so many Midwest cities look to do streetscape designs on the cheap, instead of adding value? Why do so many Midwest cities have (on average) substandard park and recreational amenities, relative to cities in other parts of the country? Why does something like Carmel’s roundabouts inspire the ire of Indy and other suburbs?
And Aaron is spot on with the sports analogy. I’m an IU grad who graduated the same year as the ’87 championship, and I know how Steve Alford was worshipped as the personification of Hoosier sports values. Same as Damon Bailey a few years later. And when Kelvin Sampson brought his (admittedly sneaky) style to Bloomington, Hoosier Nation rebeled. I’ve been considering a similar piece on my own blog that focuses on Michigan football over the last 8 years, when coach Rich Rodriguez faced the same cultural obstacles. People wanted him to win in a way that personified cultural values, and when that didn’t happen (wins or personification of values), they rebeled, too.
As for the comments of others, if you read too closely about restaurant quality between Indy and Louisville, you’re missing the point. There is an aspiration to excellence that other parts of the nation have, and the Midwest does not. We aspire to be good, not great.
Everyone knows how Frank Sinatra sang about New York — “If you can make it there, you’ll make it anywhere.” The equivalent Midwest phrase might be, “If you can’t make it there, you can’t make it anywhere.” One is aspirational, the other egalitarian. It’s a big difference.
Having now lived in Indy half of my life, what I keep returning to is that things are improving and in many areas, quickly. Think of the many places that weren’t open 3, 5, 10 years ago that are now thriving. Especially over the past 3 – 5 years, things haven’t stagnated and constant improvement is happening, despite the General Assemblies best efforts. I’m confident that a restaurant like L’Exporateur could open and thrive in today’s restaurant climate.
My biggest irritation is people who harp on what isn’t going well or what we don’t have and instead of working to make it better, do nothing but complain. Let’s work to improve this city and keep moving forward as opposed to saying things will never change and giving up. The creative class in Indy is growing and in less than 10 years, we could be among the leaders of the Midwest.
Zach, Aaron can certainly speak for himself, but I don’t think he’s making this a specific knock on Indy at all. He’s talking about an aspect of Midwest culture that’s just as evident in Terre Haute, or Decatur, IL, or Mansfield, OH, as it is in Indy.
Surely top-flight restaurants can and will thrive in Indy. But Indy and the entire Midwest are inflicted with desire to be good instead of an aspiration to be the best. Back to the resaurant analogy — can Indy have enough top-flight restaurants to compete with cities that attract residents who demand that? Certainly. But does Indy aspire to have one of the nation’s dominant culinary scenes, equivalent to New York, Chicago or New Orleans? Probably not. Enough to compete, yes; enough to excel and distinguish, nno.
That’s what I take from this piece.
Pete, as I perhaps should have made more clear, my point isn’t that Aaron’s post is utterly without foundation, it’s that it creates an absurd stereotype of the midwest that does not resemble reality. Is mediocrity a more common cultural value in the midwest than in some other parts of the country? Sure, I’ll accept that. But it’s far from a universal value.
As for IU sports, I wrote an IU sports blog from 2006 through 2013, so I’m really not grab-bagging on this issue. Again, I conceded that there were a minority of fans who walked away from IU when Sampson was hired, but TV ratings and attendance figures don’t suggest any “revolt” at any point before everything fell apart in February 2008, almost two years after he was hired. Your characterization of Steve Alford as a cultural touchstone is true enough, but a) doesn’t refute or even address anything I said in my post; and b) isn’t proof of a universal IU basketball-type approach to college sports fandom in the entirety of the midwest, as compared to a win at all costs mentality everywhere in the south. The supposed equivalence of the UNC and UK basketball programs should make the deficiency of this argument obvious to anyone with a passing acquaintance with college basketball.
@pete-rock That is an interesting way to look at it and that dichotomy seems to be playing out in Indianapolis now. You have those of us who do strive for the level of excellence that allows us to compete with the likes of Chicago and you have others who view that level of aspiration as pointless, being content to a level of consistent mediocrity. It could very well be the “Midwest values” that have held Indy back all these years. Perhaps that is the reason cities such as Portland and Denver, which have similar population sizes to Indy, are more mature in these areas. Being a native Midwesterner, if I hadn’t traveled so much in my previous line of work, I may not have the desire to achieve the excellence I saw elsewhere. However, I have more of a desire to keep the good aspects of this area and attempt to improve upon it, as opposed to fleeing to other areas where it is already a built-in mindset.
As I’ve never been to Louisville, I’d be interested to hear how urban its old neighborhoods are. From a quick glance online, it looks like it has significantly more row houses and what I’d call “near row houses” (rectangular homes built sometimes less than a foot apart) than Indianapolis. Which I’d expect, as cities that were based on river trade tended to be more urban than your more typical Midwestern cities. (But of course, correct me if I’m wrong about any of this.)
In my opinion, traditional urban areas generally have superior eating options, even in areas that have seen better days. We know, after all, what the suburbs typically offer. And Indianapolis, from what I could tell when I’ve visited – and again, I’m shooting a bit from the hip here – was big on less dense streetcar “suburbs” (located in the city proper, but in a sense detached from the historic evolution of the city). As a result, neighborhoods outside of downtown are more spread out and have less mixed use commercial spaces. You were supposed to take a streetcar from your quiet neighborhood to all the great stuff downtown. Or, today, your car (or bus, if you’re adventurous).
But unfortunately, by concentrating urban life downtown like that, you’ve essentially bottled the urban entrepreneurial spirit of your city into an expensive area with very limited space. In other words, you’ve greatly magnified the risks for urban businesses. As a result, conservative restaurants that cater to the widest audience possible are going to do the best. You simply can’t afford to cater to highly specific audiences when the stakes are that high. Your audience is a bunch of commuters.
If my assumptions about Louisville are correct, it has more urban real estate and urban population to relieve the pressure, giving more unique businesses the opportunity to operate. And if my assumptions about Louisville are wrong, then replace it with Cincinnati.
You’re out on a shaky limb with this “Midwesterners don’t value education while Southerners do” theory, as any comparison of education (from public schools to elite universities) in the two regions will attest. If education is really valued more highly in Alabama and Mississippi than in Iowa and Michigan, they have a funny way of showing it.
Zach, I agree. Indy has been improving in many ways in the past 10 years or so. I moved to L.A. for six years and apart from that being a whole other culture, it was interesting to come back to Indy to live after a six-year absence. It gave me a better perspective of not only how Indy compares to places like L.A. but also how Indy has changed.
I follow state government fairly closely, and I’m struck by how regressive the legislature is and how they seem to take pleasure in dragging Indy down with them (the mass transit issue is a good example).
George V. is spot on about Indy. And Aaron had a post on this recently. The inner suburbs are old single family neighborhoods, low density, a dearth of sidewalks and other amenities, etc. Downtown is where all the action is these days. There are occasional discussions about how to address neighborhood issues, but I seldom read about something actually being done to make them appreciably better (beyond an occasional streetscape project). It’s just not a priority.
Right now, violent crime is sucking up all the air in Indy. The city is understaffed by about 250 police officers and most everyone agrees it would be a good idea to hire more. But nobody wants to raise taxes or fees or whatever it would take to get it done. I don’t know if 250 more cops is the answer but I think it’s telling that few actually want to spend any money to solve a problem that’s tearing at the city’s fabric.
Finally, I agree that the answer lies within all of us. We have to be informed and get involved. Too many people just don’t care and we need to figure out a way to change that.
While I have not seen the culinary seen in Louisville, I have trouble believing Indianapolis is that far behind. I travel regularly to Chicago, Vegas, Miami, Portland, etc., and while Indianapolis does not have the high-high-end level restaurants ($250-$500 a person 7-course tasting menu types), the dinning is still well up there if you know where to find it. But the Libertine is better than Chicago’s Aviary, Kountry Kitchen is better than most southern breakfast joints, Cafe Patachou is comparable to the best of the big cities, Goose the Market is a one of a kind, and that is just scratching the surface.
If I had a complaint, it would be in the foreign food department around Indianapolis. Good Chinese, Indiana, Ethiopian, Greek, etc. seems lacking.
Metro Indianapolis’ bachelor’s or higher degree attainment is 31.1%, 10.5% graduate/professional; Columbus (IN) is 31.3%/10.5%. Metro Louisville’s is 25.5%/10.6%. (Source: http://www.governing.com/gov-data/educational-attainment-metro-areas-2010-census-acs.html)
Strangely enough, statewide, Indiana ranks #1 for high school graduation among the states, but 40th for degree attainment at 22.5%…a tick ahead of Kentucky at 21%. (Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_by_educational_attainment)
I am not sure this supports Aaron’s narrative unless it’s evidence that the elite are fewer in Louisville…and more elite?
I think pete-rock nailed what I’m getting at.
I’ll throw this one out there. It’s not a restaurant, but right now in Indy a younger couple opened PRINTtEXT, which is probably one of the top five periodical shops in the US and a legitimately world class (no hyperbole) store. Will enough locals patronize it in order for it to survive? That’s the real question. Individuals can desire all the excellence in the world, but realizing it is difficult in a place where it isn’t valued.
By the way, Eggshell Cafe at City Center in Carmel is a solid breakfast place. Breakfast is one meal Indy definitely gets right.
Glen: “Right now, violent crime is sucking up all the air in Indy. The city is understaffed by about 250 police officers and most everyone agrees it would be a good idea to hire more. But nobody wants to raise taxes or fees or whatever it would take to get it done. I don’t know if 250 more cops is the answer but I think it’s telling that few actually want to spend any money to solve a problem that’s tearing at the city’s fabric.”
This is just my opinion as someone born and raised in Michigan, but I believe there’s a palpable cultural antipathy in the most of the Midwest towards traditional big cities. We vacation in NYC and come home saying, “It’s a nice place to visit, but I could never live there!” In general, we view problems like crime as inherit in the urban form, and shelling out more dough to fix the problems is thought of as throwing good money after bad.
The ultimate ideal in the Midwest is to live in a quiet neighborhood and to confine the urban lifestyle to an exceedingly small historic district. This creates an unfortunate situation (repeated all over the region) where you have an over the top downtown with megalithic skyscrapers surrounded by a sea of endless low density, with constant head-scratching over why it’s always such a struggle to have a vibrant downtown. The answer to which, I think, is obvious – there is a complete disconnect between the two paradigms – though Midwesterners patently refuse to see it that way. They seemingly believe a grandiose downtown is somehow the logical culmination of endless low density.
I believe the development patterns of the Midwest are a consequence of the region’s historically rural character. Midwesterners didn’t move to the cities out of desire so much as economic necessity. And they moved out as soon as they could. Generations of immigrants adopted their viewpoints through assimilation, and the rest – as they say – is history.
There is certainly a lot of lower density (than downtown) housing in Indy, but there are also areas where this hasn’t degraded the quality of life. If you look at the blocks from 49th – 54th/Kessler on College Avenue, you can see a good combination of houses with yards and urban amenities. There are at least 10 quality bars and restaurants, a brewery tasting room, grocery store, multiple dry cleaners, liquor store, small biz offices, etc. All of this is very walkable, rideable and easily accessible via IndyGo for residents withing a couple mile radius. While it may not be as dynamic as downtown, this is a good example of where the variety of life is celebrated.
@Kilroy Check out what has been coined the International Marketplace area around 38th and Lafayette. A lot of those types of cuisines as well as markets that carry a large collection of international food and drink exist.
George V: Good points. Young professionals and empty nesters are flocking downtown and it seems most of those in the middle, with families, want to live in the suburbs for reasons of safety, education, green space, etc. The in-between areas, in other words the old suburbs of Indy, increasingly house poor people (who don’t go away when they’re displaced from gentrified areas downtown).
Being poor is seen by many staunch Midwesterners as a character flaw and of their own doing through lack of work ethic (not my take); therefore, it’s throwing good money after bad, as you say, to try to address poverty and the crime and other ills that too often accompany it … or to prioritize parks/schools/enrichment programs in poorer areas of town. It’s easier to look away and pretend it doesn’t exist. And yes, the rural vs. urban mentality plays a part in that.
Unless we begin to see all problems as everyone’s problems, these issues will persist. And they will continue to eat away at the fabric of our cities. Getting past the Midwest groupthink to get it done could be a daunting task.
@Jason Toon – “You’re out on a shaky limb with this “Midwesterners don’t value education while Southerners do” theory, as any comparison of education (from public schools to elite universities) in the two regions will attest. If education is really valued more highly in Alabama and Mississippi than in Iowa and Michigan, they have a funny way of showing it.”
Yes, I agree. As others have noted, the very Big Ten schools that Aaron referred to in his post, generally speaking, have higher academic standards than their SEC counterparts (although the Big Ten certainly has its fair share of NCAA infractions). It’s counterintuitive to claim that Big Ten fans “expect their players to get an education” (Aaron’s exact words) on the one hand and then turn around and state that the Midwest doesn’t value education in the same manner as the South. I don’t see how the Midwest has lower educational standards than the South at all at *any* level (whether it’s grade schools, high schools or universities).
That’s separate from the culinary issue, which I’d agree the South generally has more variation and quality than the Midwest (outside of Chicago). As a lifelong Chicagoan, food in plenty of places in the South are far more intriguing than what I’d find anywhere else in the Midwest. However, I just highly disagree that this has anything to do with the perceived value of education: places like New Orleans, Memphis and Charleston have outstanding food compared to Indianapolis, but I’d take the educational system in the Indy area top to bottom (which is even more greatly enhanced by the relatively easy access to IU and Purdue) over those Southern locales any day of the week (and I’m by no means an Indy booster).
@Frank the Tank, I think I highlighted in my post that in a democratic state, the level of the common man is higher than in an aristocracy. I think the higher average level of education in the Midwest is very consistent with that. What’s missing is the high end of accomplishment in most Midwest places.
@Aaron – Yes, I see your point there, but is the South really all that “spiky” in terms of educational attainment (i.e. a very elite class with lots of plebeians below)? From the studies that I’ve read in the past, the locales in the Sun Belt that are drawing large numbers of educated residents are places like Houston, Dallas, Austin, Atlanta, Charlotte and Raleigh-Durham. Out of those locales, only Austin and, to a lesser extent, Raleigh-Durham are really that attractive to urbanists, while the others have lot of attributes of car-oriented Indianapolis on a larger scale. The places in the South that we think of as artsy or culinary centers (i.e. New Orleans, Memphis, etc.) generally have lower educational levels.
I’m not saying I have any idea what all of that means. If anything, there just doesn’t seem to be a clear correlation one way or the other.
This old Paul Krugman essay is probably on point.
And it’s worth noting out here in Portland–our reputation as a foodie paradise is something that was only recently acquired–for most of the 20th century, the Rose City was a west coast backwater that paled in amenities compared to Seattle and the various California metropoli, despite having some of the best farmland a short distance away.
And then, something changed.
Portland has seen great improvement at both the high and low end. We’ve got more fancy restaurants than you can shake a stick at, but the humble food cart is also a source of regional pride. In many cities (and I know little of Indy), food carts are routinely suppressed by established restaurant interests–could the reportedly bad food in Indy be cause, in part, by a business and regulatory climate that discourages rocking the boat, much as average students may try to pummel the classroom nerd who blows out the curve? (I’m asking this sincerely, not rhetorically).
You can even see this within a single state that outsiders might assume has a common culture. I live in Columbia, South Carolina and I see the dynamic. Columbia, being in the center of the state, and home to stable industries like state government, flagship state university, and a big army base, is the “Midwest” of South Carolina (heck, the region is called the Midlands), and Charleston is, well, Charleston. My family were at a local weekly farmer’s market in downtown Columbia Saturday, and it was bittersweet to see so many cool “local” food vendors – they were nearly all from Charleston, 100 miles away, and not Columbia.
I’ve come to think that South Carolina only has two genuine cities – Charleston and Greenville. The latter is kind of like a big, Southern Piedmont version of Columbus, Indiana – and has a history of J. Irwin Miller-type people like Roger Milliken and the Hipps of Liberty Insurance. It hasn’t just been content to land the big BMW plant – it keeps evolving. Columbia is more of a big town than a city – and seems to rest on its laurels because it has such a stable base. It is definitely more of an “average” place. Without sunbelt-related inmigration (e.g., lots of folks from western PA, Ohio, Upstate NY, etc.), I would fear it would lose any real sense of growth. It’s certainly a very pleasant place, but one wonders if there is any real upside in the city’s future.
Did the South’s aristocratic culture help its economy at any time before FDR? Is the South particularly more productive than the Midwest per capita? Your cultural arguments are unfalsifiable voodoo blaming relative growth on anything but the obvious (external economic headwinds and severe disadvantage in federal investments).
Between this and the let-the-Millenials-eat-ghetto grousing, I’m seeing a pattern: let’s pin difficulties on people who rub you the wrong way. I didn’t see much in the way of any actual supportive reasoning or evidence.
Maybe the north of England or the Ruhr or Wallonia are similarly bogged down by insufficiently aristocratic cultures. Oh no, they’re also just legacy industrial districts? Whoops.
Everyone’s shifted here to debates about education now as well as the food scene, and it seems everyone is still avoiding the Midwestern mediocrity point Aaron makes.
The Midwest has always been “good”. Good schools, good communities, good people. Good defines the region. But excellence does not. And in an era when excellence, or distinctiveness, or niche, is rewarded, simply being good is not good enough. Frankly, even saying things are better than they were before is not good enough, either.
I say this as one born and raised in Michigan, lived in and attended college in Indiana, and have spent the last two-plus decades in Illinois — the Midwest has never defined the excellence it aspires to, and that retards its economic rebirth.
The hinterland does make a difference. Wisconsin, for one, has a very strong local sense of identity, and even in Chicago the farmers’ markets are full of Wisconsin products, especially their famed cheese. The communities of Michigan’s “west coast” stick together and produce some notable artisanal products. I’m not sure what they’re making down on the Ohio, but they do have a shared history and a local culture they’re proud of.
Indianapolis doesn’t have either a mature urban personality nor any strong links to its countryside, which in any case is the most homogenized swath of the corn belt. It’s being flooded by people from similarly colorless places who come there to work. Hence, the chains. Any biologist will tell you invasive species thrive in a disturbed environment.
Kurt Vonegut wrote a story on egalitarianism called “Harrison Bergeron”. It is set in a future in which they weigh the best ballet dancers down with weights and shoot a current through the brightest thinkers heads, all to keep everyone else from feeling inferior.
Oh, but there is an aristocrat class in Indy — all of the attorneys, politicians, and self-anointed “civic leaders” that have achieved slightly more education than the typical Hoosier, yet still barely break the 50th percentile when ranked with their peers nationally. Their famed Hoosier Hospitality turns to Hoosier Hostility the instant the carpetbaggers — the culturally competent creatives who are willing to work hard to achieve excellence — threaten the status-quo by daring to make changes that could insulate future Hoosiers from “the way daddy always done it”…which is, of course, the basis of the aristocrats’ ascendency. Yes, the class system is alive and well in Indy…and those that govern operate in a distinct caste, separate not only from the higher-level creatives, but also from those that collect the garbage, issue permits, collect taxes, police the streets, and educate children. That’s why civic policy in Indy, no matter how enlightened, rarely becomes animated within the gears and cogs of the civic machine, and why that machine will never produce a “world-class” quality of life. The governing aristocrats are both threatened by “non-native thinkers” and unable to communicate effectively with their functionaries; the classes don’t mingle. And what of the “competent creatives” who we would love to have working to achieve civic excellence? They’ve given up and moved beyond those decidedly ‘middle class’ endeavors to exercise their brains (and capital) on other equally worthy (and likely more lucrative) endeavors. The creative class in Indy is as unwilling to plumb the depths of the governing class (the born-n-bred Hoosier aristocrats) as the governing class is likely to get dirt under their fingernails working with plebes. The creatives float up and skim the cream while the old-guard aristocracy grinds away feverishly, trying to justify their allotment of daily (artisanal) bread to the voters/taxpayers/stakeholders. The poor, uneducated, unwashed masses are lucky to receive the scraps. Each group occupies and operates within their own narrow band, and Indy is subsequently a narrow city. God Bless the aristocrats — I’m sure they mean well!
There may be a mediocrity mindset in some parts of the Midwest, but I have rarely encountered it in working with cities throughout Wisconsin. I don’t see this mindset in the cities and I don’t see it in the leadership of most public or private companies. Wausau aspires to be Minneapolis/St. Paul (not in size – but in urban riverfront amenities). Green Bay has been in an epic multi-month battle against a proposed downtown Walmart – on a brownfields site that has been vacant for a decade or more, on which $5 million will be needed for demolition and cleanup – with no public funds requested, in an area where there is demonstrated need for a food store, and with Walmart having revised their proposal for the 3rd or 4th time. Why has the proposal now been rejected by the city council for the 4th or 5th time? Because the city thinks they can do better. Kohler Corporation somehow missed the message that Wisconsin is a northern state with a long winter and probably not the best place to develop a top golf resort. They also missed the message that an active 100 year old heavy industrial facility wouldn’t be an appropriate place to develop a 5 star spa and resort. They set an absurdly ambitious goal (and fully achieved it). I could provide dozens of compelling examples from Milwaukee and Madison, as well as Sheboygan, Kenosha, Racine, and many others. I don’t see any leadership (public or private) in these cities championing or promoting mediocrity.
I would say the same for Goshen IN where I worked extensively as well – where there is an attitude of high expectations and quality, and for achieving this in a manner that is also 100% unique and authentic to the area (imagine combining Amish/Mennonite community values, with creative class amenities, in a area that is a center for low cost manufacturing).
In any event, the mediocrity character may be applicable to some areas of the Midwest – but I would absolutely reject it being broadly applicable to the Midwest as a whole (or with Chicago as the exception). I see more of a mediocrity mindset in much of the Great Plains, Texas, Florida, etc.
In response to John M., there is a huge difference between the”student body” and their embracing of Kelvin Sampason and the people who have IU in their DNA. Don’t forget more than half the student body now is from the east coast. The life long Hoosiers fans “never” and repeat “never settle” for immoral ways to win. This is why we HATE UK so much. Maybe you are not from Indiana and missed this along the way. Understandable.
It’s shocking that nobody mentions immigration and the variety of food most common in high ratio immigrant cities. Somerville, Massachusetts, was a suburb of Boston about 100 years ago and is now an “inner city” having gone through conversions by Ford, as Assembly Square the home of the Edsel, and then by the Mafia, as the Chop Shop for the whole East Coast, and now as a very incongruous blend of immigrant (largely South American and Asian), Yuppie, and “townie” (largely Irish and Italian). Yet our foods vary from Peruvian fish stores to Nepalese haute cuisine, and they draw people from all over the world. It’s not because of residual “class” barriers like the South (certainly not because of slavery!). Nor is it because of residual class, since the city was gritty from its beginning. Nor is it because of any of the other arguments raised here. It’s mostly because of newcomers – both working class and students and faculty class. And that diversity is so massively anti-elite that there’s currently a boycott of our largest grocer, because they fired some of our favorite people.
Todd, this isn’t a sports site, so I don’t want to go too far down this road, but I’ve lived in Indiana for the vast majority of my life (I’m not sure how you could have missed that). I was around during the Sampson era and blogging about IU athletics during that time, so rest assured I was paying close attention. Again, it’s obvious that IU never should have hired Sampson, and at no point have I disagreed with this notion that there was a slim minority of fans who walked away from the program during that era. Plenty who continued to support the program did so with skepticism. Nevertheless, there was no “revolt.” If you have any objective evidence, such as attendance figures, season ticket sales, boos during team introductions, vast swaths of empty seats in the alumni section, etc., I’ll consider it. But again, since I was paying close attention at the time, I don’t expect you to be able to produce such evidence, because it doesn’t exist. Of course, my main objection to the IU example isn’t that Aaron is wrong so much about the IU basketball culture, but he is wrong to suggest that it is universal in the midwest and unheard of in the south. The UNC-UK equivalance is particularly untenable.
Also, nothing approaching “half of the student body” is from the east coast. Sixty percent of IU-Bloomington’s students are from Indiana. If you believe that having students from other parts of the country is a bad thing, I have to pretty strongly disagree.
I’m an Illinois alum that has long had a nickname on my blog for Kelvin Sampson: “Satan’s Spawn”. My impression is that many IU fans *retroactively* loathe Sampson since the circumstances around his firing effectively tanked recruiting for the next several seasons and ushered in arguably the worst period in modern Indiana basketball history. While Sampson was actually still coach, though, I didn’t find too many IU fans complaining about poaching a verbally committed Eric Gordon from Illinois. (To be fair, I probably would have taken the lawyerly “Nothing is final until the letter is signed” argument if the roles were reversed.) It seems to be more of a 20/20 hindsight viewpoint of the very lean years immediately following Sampson’s firing (as opposed to objections *during* Sampson’s time there).
@pete-rock – I think that’s the disconnect. I don’t think there’s an air of, “The Midwest just settles for less, so that’s why they have less.” That’s a subjective stereotype of people’s personal beliefs that we can never know.
There are plenty of objective reasons why the Midwest may have less than other regions, both self-inflicted (i.e. unfriendly policies toward businesses, corruption, cronyism, poor urban planning, cow-towing to special interest groups instead of adjusting to the new global economy, etc.) and out of their control (i.e. cold winter weather, distance from the coasts, relative lack of scenic geographic features compared to other parts of the country, etc.). I’m not one of those people that thinks that Midwestern cities are going to bounce back “just because”. I don’t think it’s inevitable when there are so many in-place options that either provide the urbanity that many young people want (major coastal cities plus a handful of interior options like Chicago) or lower real estate and business costs with better winter weather (in much of the Sub Belt), which makes it difficult for places that don’t have those attributes already to grow back beyond some outlier neighborhoods.
However, I don’t think it’s a case of, “They don’t want to do it.” Much of the Midwest might objectively have poor leadership and/or policies that get in the way of progress, but I disagree that Midwesterners don’t subjectively *want* progress. The desire is there, but the implementation has been failing all too often.
Indy not having a great food scene isn’t a referendum on other MW cities. Each city has their own culture and strengths, Indy’s being farm-to-table breakfast vs. fine dining. Just a reflection of the people as Renn pointed out.
Frank: “However, I don’t think it’s a case of, ‘They don’t want to do it.'”
I think the acceptance of mediocrity could almost be viewed as a coping mechanism. Of course we want better, but we don’t want to get our hopes up too much. Cities like Chicago and Detroit ably demonstrate that historically, when the economic conditions were right, there was a huge drive in th Midwest to be the best. Terminal Tower in Cleveland wasn’t settling. Sears/Willis Tower in Chicago wasn’t settling. The Renaissance Center in Detroit wasn’t settling.
I think our spirit was broken by too many economic busts. Prolonged economic contractions in the industrial sectors made people lose faith. The ascendancy of warm weather cities and the associated glitz (LA, Las Vegas, Miami, etc.) drove home the view that we were economic has-beens, so to speak. We became content to coast, to not challenge ourselves too much, because we were afraid of failure. We’ve felt its bitter sting one too many times.
I do think we’re finally starting to regain our courage, though. We’re finally venturing out of our hiding spots, back to the neighborhoods and places where it all began. Bit by bit, we’re trying to regain our swagger, our pride. People are proud, again, to say they’re from Detroit, Cleveland, or Indianapolis, discarding the old “well, I actually live in X suburb” disclaimer.
One consequence of that is that the culinary scene really is improving in the Midwest. It has a ways to go, but I don’t know how you could objectively say it was better in the ’90s or ’80s.
Now, will we ever come back fully? Only time will tell…
Do you think the richie, conservative power brokers give a shit about government in Indy? Hell no, unless it has to do with higher taxes or more business regulation. But they don’t have any reason to give a shit because the classes don’t mingle. For example, Indy is similar to Seattle in population, but Indy’s not at all like Seattle in that the different social classes are able to live (more or less) geographically close to each another. Seattle has inherent class mingling. Look at the urban form and the neighborhoods here — there aren’t a lot of mixed-income neighborhoods, if you use housing price as a proxy for income. Obviously we are also a low-density city, which also contributes to the lack of mixed uses (i.e. higher density forced by geography necessitates mixed-use, mixed-income development.) No mixed-income neighborhoods, no class mingling. No class mingling, narrow city. Narrow city, mediocrity. But not for the reasons proposed by Renn.
Indy is held hostage by whatever (mediocre) gains the bureaucratic aristocracy can wring from their (uneducated) functionaries with the relatively little help they get from the (powerful) creative elites. That’s why the Super Bowl Legacy Projects is a “model” for revitalization. Leaders managed to bring two of the three major social classes in Indy together.
Now, how to get the relatively uneducated, unempowered worker class (and I’m including the criminal/welfare class here as well…) to fall in line? That’s the million dollar question, but the solution clearly hinges on providing high-quality education and earning opportunities over the long term. The Richie power brokers can only effectively address these needs if they understand them. Who understands the issues of the poor, uneducated, plebes well enough to carry their message to the rich, powerful, creatives? Yes, the message must be carried…unless there is some way to magically achieve the requisite class mingling and shared understanding of these disparate social issues. The aristocratic bureaucracy certainly isn’t up to the task — they’ve failed at that charge for the last 50 years…because they don’t mingle with the other classes enough to thoroughly understand and analyze issues, or subsequently formulate and effectively convey solutions to those that can make changes. It’s not because Midwesterners settle for mediocrity or don’t value education — it’s because Midwesterners are loathe to embrace people that aren’t like them. But they’re all so fucking friendly — to the people that look and act and think like they do. Class mingling is key.
See previous essay/analysis on why that won’t happen before and unless the bureaucratic aristocracy makes major changes in how they deliver municipal services.
This is a really interesting discussion, and I’ll try not to repeat what others have said:
I agree with the many who have challenged Aaron’s view of education in the Midwest. Nearly all of the Big Ten Schools are generally ranked in the top 100 universities in the world; Only the flagships in the largest southern states rank that high (UNC, UT-Austin, and UFlorida); the rest are smaller, graduate-intensive private schools like Duke, Vandy, and Rice. Keep in mind also that the South’s population is about 40% larger than the Midwest. Nearly all Midwesterners have access to a top-100 public university within their states. The paucity of good universities in the South is a legacy of segregation and the aristocratic opposition to public education (ie, the English model).
What I think you are missing about Midwestern culture is its egalitarianism, which I would agree can lead to mediocrity, in the sense that social inequality is less “spiky”. The Midwest was settled in a way that was unique in the US – small, family farms that were generally the same size, reinforced by communitarian religious values and a suspicion of success that comes without hard work. In addition, the economy of the Midwest was never based on resource ‘extraction’ like it was in Appalachia (coal) and the South (cotton). What was generally grown and made in the Midwest was also consumed by Midwesterners (and the surplus exported). I looked up a list from the Brookings Institution of the cities with the greatest income inequality, and while there was no discernible difference between Indy and Louisville, the cities that showed up at the top were nearly all ‘foodie’ cities (SF, Boston, NY, Chicago) OR had poor populations that were extremely poor (Atlanta, Baltimore) or both (Miami). While I find that mindset stifling sometimes, I also appreciate how historically it has limited stratification, at least among the White Midwestern population.
My hometown of Terre Haute – is certainly not a foodie city — a 1980s tourist guide crowed that restaurants there don’t serve “unpronounceable greens” – also produced Eugene Debs and Theodore Dreiser, both of whom were fought or chronicled the transformation from an egalitarian rural culture to a economically stratified industrial culture. Terre Haute’s reputation as a “union town” goes back to the fight to preserve those egalitarian rural values, in my opinion. I saw a menu from the Terre Haute House in 1850, and they served food better than any restaurant in the city today. It also had a black chef, so take that FWIW; see below. Terre Haute used to be a city, but it’s now filled mostly with country people. Indianapolis is their next step up, so it doesn’t surprise me that Indy’s food scene has historically been middle of the road. (Same for Columbus, Ohio). I bet if you surveyed the patrons of those fancy places in Indy mentioned in the comments, most of them are either old money, or new arrivals. If ‘world-class’ means a yawning divide between rich and poor, my guess is that most Hoosiers, and many Midwesterners, would pass on that kind of ‘improvement’.
Another thing to consider is the racial genealogy of the food cultures in the North and South. I generally find southern food to be much, much better than Northern food – and my gut tells me its because of the influence of African-Americans. Unlike the North, the south has a very large rural Black population which has had to be creative and inventive in the face of scarcity in ways that rural Midwesterners generally did not, except during the Great Depression. That rural food forms the base for the regional cuisine. Rural food in the Old Northwest is heavily influenced by German immigrants, and doesn’t stray far from the white-flour Amish restaurants that dot the region. Memphis, Charleston and New Orleans are all merchant/port cities with significant food influences from their large African-American populations, or Cajun/Caribbean. That tension between aristocratic expectations, Black servants to whom a White diner could give an honest (if not rudely so) evaluation of the food, and Black creativity probably contributes to the better food in the South. I can’t tell you how many times at family gatherings, at friends’ homes, at restaurants, etc, I’ve found myself saying “mmm, great” to the cook when I really wanted to say “this is crap.” In my experience, it goes back to a stigma against criticizing someone who has made an effort to make something for you, and is interpreted as ‘complaining’ rather than ‘improving’. I wonder if this dynamic was different between Louisville and Indy?
As for the basketball Hoosiers, look back farther to Bobby Knight for an example par excellence of those play-straight values. Folks in my family really admired him for his fundamentals approach to the game, and easily forgave his emotional excesses because they saw it emanating from his frustration with players, officials or others not playing the right way. John Wooden is another example of this; Steve Alford, Damon Bailey, Oscar Robertson, Larry Bird, all of them embodied those same, egalitarian values of fundamental values + individual effort = success. Hoosiers love a winner, as long as they play fair.
A quick impression about Columbus, Indiana – the degree to which it is the best small city in Indiana is, of course, dependent on the Fortune 500 largesse. I havent been there in about 10 years, but my impressions of it were that it was Seymour with some world-class architecture. Once those modernist buildings were out of sight, I had trouble distinguishing it from any other small city in the state. I’m not convinced that the world-beating approach of the city’s industrial fathers has trickled down to the rest of the population, but again, I don’t know much about the place.
Last (finally) I would agree with others who warned against making generalizations about the North and South based on those two cities. I’d say both are second-least of their type: Louisville is most Northern Southern City (after Atlanta) and Indy the most Southern Northern City (after Cincinnati). I think you’re search for the border between the North and South, but both Indy and Louisville are borderland cities, not exemplars of their regions.
Wow Tyson angry much? You do make quite a few plausible assertions but railing against the autocracy instead of ignoring them and moving along headfirst is a better expenditure of time and energy.
The mingling of classes is a valid point, I would rebut that Seattle is heading the way of mission district and overall San Francisco a two tiered society if you will. I believe Indy as you have stated is more a mixture of commonality and comfort, nothing more or less. I think in the long term the Indy model will hold up as tensions over hipsters, techies and other “richies” are reaching boiling points eg vandalism decrying those in San Fran this past weekend.
FYI I feel your passion and agree with most of your points however vulgarity used to express oneself cheapens your arguments. Your well thought out response prove your better and above that.
Speaking of aristocracy, one thing I’ve noticed about the Midwest is that it lacks major colleges and universities that were founded by the fortunes of aristocrats. In the Northeast you have universities like Cornell, Drexel, Carnegie Mellon, Johns Hopkins and Rutgers; and in the South you have universities like Duke, Clemson, Vanderbilt, Tulane and Rice. All of them were named after the philanthropic aristocrats who founded them.
In the Midwest, the closest you get to those are universities like Northwestern, Washington (St. Louis) and Case Western Reserve, but the former two were collaborative efforts by several political, religious and business leaders, and the latter involved a merger of a private university with a public university, so they’re more a symbol of collective excellence, rather than individual excellence like the universities in the Northeast and South that bear the names of their elite founders.
To me, it seems as though part of the reason the Midwest has so many highly ranked public universities is because of the relative lack of highly ranked private universities.
One more thing…the new tourism motto for Indiana would have been so much better if they’d changed “goodness” to “greatness” – “Honest to Greatness”.
Mention a few astronauts, writers, diplomats, athletes, what have you…and share Vonnegut’s quote: “I don’t know what it is about Hoosiers, but wherever you go there is always a Hoosier doing something very important there.”
@thejerkstore – yeah, I think my analysis is frustrating, but I also think it’s pretty accurate, and I’m not hearing anyone else say some of these things. And I like to just put it out there in simple language that’s easy to digest. I do forge ahead, and in order to be successful I believe it’s important to have a fully formed (theoretical) understanding of the issues that can stymie progress…before you start forging. 🙂
Traverse City, MI, also has foodie following that extends to NYC via Mario Batali.
I’m no fine food connoisseur, so I’ll leave that discussion to others, and I agree with what others have said in regards to refuting Aaron’s claim about education not being as highly valued in the Midwest in the South.
On the overall theme of mediocrity, I’ve always found Indy’s built environment and quality of places to be mediocre or worse. The public spaces, with a few exceptions, are probably mediocre when measured against most places in what I’ll call the Lower Midwest, but pale in comparison to the norm in the Upper Midwest of Wisconsin, Minnesota, and Iowa. And of for the most part, the locals seem to be resigned to it, if not completely accepting of it.
There might be a bit of the hesitancy to rise too far above the pack, that I think Aaron was theorizing, throughout the entire Midwest, but I see some difference in the Upper Midwest (include Chicago to some extent) trying to pull everyone up, i.e. make life better and public places more appealing and safer for everyone, as opposed to the Lower Midwest being more content with stagnation. When the elite don’t want to be too far above the pack, but aren’t doing anything to lift the rest of the pack, it’s pretty hard to seek excellence in anything you do. I always got the sense that the mindset in the Upper Midwest was to raise the bar for all people and all neighborhoods, which then makes it acceptable for the upper class to stand out and strive for excellence.
There are so many anecdotes, stereotypes, generalizations and subjective claims in this topic and its responses that the only goal seems to be who can actually repeat the highest number of them.
Not to mention that, if anything, all this illustrates is that many people view the Midwest as a lesser region compared to other parts of the nation. “Good” is not good enough, because everywhere else is better. This smacks of an inferiority complex than any actual evidence of inferiority. The classic “grass is greener” belief.
Jon
Remembering the name of this website, and paraphrasing Michelin, what about Indianapolis would be worth a detour? Southwest flied many places.
Rod,
1. Indianapolis 500
2. Monon, Fall Creek and the Canal Towpath Trails
3. American Legion Mall and Indiana World War Memorial, plus the Central Library
4. Monument Circle
5. Lucas Oil Stadium for Colts vs. Patriots or Broncos
6. The airport terminal. Really.
7. A long walk through the north end of Butler Tarkington and Meridian Kessler, with stops at the neighborhood nodes.
8. (According to Aaron) Downtown Carmel (upscale suburb to the north)
9. Local winery and brewery tour
10. A walk through old Irvington followed by Slaughterhouse Five pizza from Jockamo’s Upper Crust Pizza. And a Pogue’s Run Porter from Flat 12 Bierworks.
11. Lunch at Pogue’s Run Grocer.
12. Rent-a-bike tour of the Cultural Trail
13. 100 Acres
14. International Orangutan Center at the Indianapolis Zoo.
15. The world’s largest Children’s Museum.
16. Side trip for the architectural tour of Columbus, Ind.
Even though many of these sites are downtown, and almost all are served by public transit, one would want a car. Indy isn’t Chicago. 🙂
@Chris Barnett:
Sorry Chris, but most of these things are just not unique enough to make it a destination. The suburban town center, war memorial, zoo, stadium, wineries and airport are available many places. I can get all those things in DC, plus world class museums and the pomp and splendor of our nation’s capital. I can get the wine and food in the Bay Area/ Napa, at national standard, plus SF and the Golden Gate Bridge.
When I was growing up in Portland, we had the scenery, but it wasn’t Yosemite/ Yellowstone distinctive, and so people didn’t vacation there. Now people who are city nuts go there because of the walkability, the food and all the urban features that get talked about. Truth to tell, you can get most of these, up a notch or more, in Vancouver, BC, and that’s why that place is really on the map. People don’t go places for zoos and children’s museums, and they don’t want to drive on their vacation unless they have kids and its for the Southern California theme parks. To become a national magnet for money, talent and young people, you need something distinctive, like Austin’s music scene or Boulder’s
climbing and hiking. Lots of Sim City attractions like a stadium and fancy airport terminals don’t really add up. (See Detroit). It’s the synergy of food and walkability, plus something really distinctive, that put you on the national map and make people curious about going there. Other than the Indy 500, I’m not sure what would really get me there, and I’m not a race car fan. Meanwhile, I’ve got pretty good opportunity to stop over in Philly, Boston or New York if I want old-style city, and they all have good food. I suspect that’s true for many people.
@Chris Barnett:
P.S. Pogue’s Post, on Yahoo Tech, has a review of the new Amazon phone, and there are certain similarities to the city question in this: If there are already a lot of smart phones out on the market, either Apple or Androids, how do you get attention as yet another? You’ve got to have something exceptional to offer, or be very, very good on many, many features. The competition is stiff, we’ve all made our choices already, and so it’s going to take something different and better to stand out.
@Chris Barnett: Your last line may make the point: “Indy isn’t Chicago”. I don’t know if that means it’s different, or just not as much.
I just the other day reread your essay on Columbus. Interesting parallels between food and design.
Christopher:
We’re all becoming more Italian in our interests. The missing overlay is technology, which not only keeps the areas competitive in the business world, but brings the wealth necessary to patronize these good things. (Asheville, home to the home-made, still relies on the wealth of the Northeast to keep it going.) The places that really seem to be getting ahead these days are those that have worked technology into the everyday functions of life, be that buying books, arranging insurance, or managing money.
“Not to mention that, if anything, all this illustrates is that many people view the Midwest as a lesser region compared to other parts of the nation. “Good” is not good enough, because everywhere else is better. This smacks of an inferiority complex than any actual evidence of inferiority. The classic “grass is greener” belief.”
I tend to agree- there are far too many exceptions to make a generalization about the whole region.
Cleveland seems to be developing a number of almost over the top- foodie restaurants, many beyond the price range of the average resident.
We just got back from Cincinnati which also seems to have a pretty intense food scene- like a Chinese Restaurant in Covington with a vast beer list.
If anything, Cincinnati stuck out for not doing average well. Over the Rhine had lots of new, artisanal, places – along with many homeless. Almost every pre 1960 building is special in some way.
Pittsburgh seems to have a friendly, easy in between quality.
Aaron:
I wonder if the lack of competition from other big cities in Indiana is part of the cause.
In Ohio, the 3C’s compete. None have what I would call top shelf-$200+ a plate restaurants, but all have a decent showing at the next level and downwards.
Chicago’s peers are New York and LA, so it competes with them on every level.
In Minnesota, the Twin Cities are kind of the regional hub city for the northern plains, so it gets a bump from being the dominant city, kind of like Denver does.
Indianapolis, on the other had, doesn’t have any of these characteristics that I would consider boosters to the local foodie scene. It’s not a hub-too close to Chicago- and it’s not competing with much else in the State.
On top of this, it doesn’t have a long heritage that might give it a leg up, like Kansas City in Barbecue.
I can only speak to Ohio, but I agree. Historically, Cleveland had the best food, imo, given it had the greatest diversity, especially during its boom years. Cincinnati was probably 2nd, and Columbus a distant 3rd. Cincinnati and especially Columbus have made a ton of improvements in this category in recent years. Part of it may due just with the competition within the state, but I see a lot of cross-exchange happening. Home-grown restaurants from each city are expanding to the others, and the quality of the scene overall is definitely rising. If there was a general malaise in this category before, I’m not seeing it so much now.
The Midwest includes Misouri and Kansas City is a great food town, not as great as it was 25 years ago, but still great. There is barbecue, but there is much more. It has its problems, but there are many interesting and unique venues there.
I think the mediocrity of Indianapolis is apparent in its buildings and its infrastructure. Mayor Hudnut was the last leader with a real vision for the city; it’s been downhill since he left office. He left a legacy that has been degraded and neglected by all of his succesors. Downhill at the state level as well.
Corruption is now common and accepted at all levels of government, to the benefit of a select few.
The existing transportation system and infrastructure can’t support the existing development, but development continues unabated. One might ask why a planning agency continues to approve building permits without requiring more from the developers and considering the impact on traffic and quality of life.
I’ll stop now.
John, the majority of the “homeless” you saw aren’t really homeless, though some are certainly rough characters. OTR is ‘the old ‘hood’ where they get together. It functions like a ‘little Italy’ or ‘Polish town’ does in other cities, except its for the poor blacks who have no disposable income. Cincinnatians, rich, poor, black, and white are very attached to particular neighborhoods much like New Orleans in my experience.
Before all of you start talking about why your Midwest town better than Indy, don’t make the assumption that it is. The overall quality of every city has increased so much in the last few years, it can mislead places about their relative standing.
For example, I can’t speak too much about its restaurants, but from what I’ve seen Columbus, Ohio is the epitome of Midwest “solid but not great”. I noted its lack of truly standout items in my recent series on the city.
Likewise I read a lot of urban stuff related to the Midwest and while I’ve doubtless missed some things, I don’t exactly have an overflowing inbox of reports from its cities suggesting a culture of excellence.
http://pjmedia.com/lifestyle/2014/07/22/the-10-most-underrated-destinations-in-the-midwest/?singlepage=true
And let’s all remember: it could be worse. Indianapolis could be Providence!
@Aaron… But you’re basing your positions on personal, subjective opinions and tastes. There is no way to quantify “better” or “best” in any scientific or data-based way when it comes to food/restaurant quality, or for that matter “cultural excellence.” What is there to say your tastes are superior to those who may consider the restaurants or cultural experiences in Indy or Columbus or any other Midwest city to be superior to those in other parts of the nation? No one, including you, can really speak to some factual level of authority on these topics. We can give personal viewpoints and nothing more, but you can’t exactly call anyone’s view wrong. If I claimed Detroit had the best food in the Midwest, who could factually call me incorrect?
Also, 2 places on that list aren’t even located in the Midwest. Little doubt why they’re then underrated as Midwestern places to visit.
@Jon:
This is where the “market” of reputation comes in. Obviously there are wine, food, music, theater and movie critics who are the ‘taste makers’ that set the standard by expressing themselves in media like the New York Times, the New Yorker, Sauver and public radio. A place’s reputation comes from visitors say about it, not what a place says about itself. Perhaps there’s a correlation between provincialism and mediocre food.
I know Aaron is trying to start conversations, but the many post he does when he visits lack depth and commitment.
Before casting stones he should spend more time looking and exploring. At least he lived in Chicago, Providence and Indy. The posts about Columbus & Cincinnati came after very short drive by visits. The Dallas post after spending barely 1 or 2 days. (A few hours on the street)
I think one can judge some very high profile public projects with this kind of glance, but not a broad culture.
Strange, but cities never seem to complain about a depth of knowledge when some NYT Travel section reporter does a 36 hour flyby and writes some glowing missive. It’s only when they fail to have as boosterish a point of view as the locals that a lack of quality time becomes a problem.
Also, have you ever noticed how much money places invest in marketing in order to convince people to spend their own hard earned cash to come visit a city for a day or weekend? Yet apparently whatever experiences you have during those times doesn’t count – unless it’s positive of course.
I do think it requires more effort to back critical reviews than puff compliments.
I’m not saying you are right or wrong, but you should commit more personal time before making sweeping statements of this type.
The Dallas post and several others at best- give one idea of what a lazy traveler on a short visit might come away thinking.
One of the things that I find fascinating and useful about the articles and discussions on this website regarding various cities is that there is value in the impressions (even if I am inclined to strongly disagree with the characterization of some cities). There is some fundamental truth about what Aaron wrote about Louisville and Indianapolis, and the observations are consistent with my limited stays in both cities. But even if not entirely accurate, the opinions of Aaron (and others) are still useful in providing insight into the stereotypes or reputations of these cities. I appreciate the efforts to keep fresh material on this site, even if every article isn’t as perfect or as deeply researched as it could be if this was a paid site.
Tripe
Two years ago, in return for my filling out some surveys, Zagat sent me a condensed guide to top restaurants across America in 45 cities. For food quality with a score of 26 or over (30 being the top, and 26 being “extraordinary to perfection”), it shows the following counts: Milwaukee: 10, Detroit: 10, Cincinnati: 11, Columbus: 11, St. Louis: 13, Kansas City: 14, Cleveland: 16, DC: 23, Denver: 24, Houston: 26, Seattle: 30, Chicago: 30, Boston: 31, Bay Area: 32, New Orleans, 32, NYC, Westchester and Long Island (not including New Jersey or CT): 96.
Indianapolis is not one of the 45 cities listed. The number above are probably at least a function of business expense accounts. There is probably grade inflation in the mid-tier markets where the competition is less intense.
@Rod… That just strikes me as self-important bs. Food can only be called good when a select group of people deem it so? In general, it has less to do with the quality of the food, but in the connections a place has. For me personally, some of the absolute best restaurants I’ve ever eaten at would never be found in a single food guide, both inside and outside of the US. Aaron brought up the point on how much some places spend on marketing. Marketing doesn’t guarantee the best meal. It only guarantees that more people will be talking about it. Thousands of places will never have that buzz regardless of quality.
That guide ranking is also questionable in that it compares a city of 9 million with a city of less than 300,000. Wouldn’t a per-capita look be more accurate rather than simply total count?
Between Urban Spoon, Yelp, and the popularity of food in our media, there are relatively few undiscovered good restaurants today. Of all the “markets” in America, for housing, electronics, clothing or medicine, the market for food is one of the largest, most competitive and most efficient.
I am inclined to Rod Stevens’s view. Most of the really great places can be found- if you look. However, a large percent of the posts by Aaron seem to reflect very short snapshots. It really doesn’t seem like he looks very hard.
If Pittsburgh is a good indicator, a lot of the best stuff flies a bit under the radar. The town does not always put its best foot forward for for the very short visit. Till very recently the downtown was the dullest place.
IMHO, many tourist agencies hype the least interesting aspects of their cities. Dallas heavily markets a really subpar and dead downtown as a grand “arts district” while midtown seems much more interesting.
Many city insiders don’t seem to grasp which aspects of their cities are unique.
For example, The Indianapolis Museum seems to be surrounded by a larger park. For better of worse- this is different. Perhaps it should develop and market a world class sculpture park.
Cleveland has undermined the organic music scene that fits in well with the Rock Hall. I doubt many Providence insiders knew the buzz the city’s underground artists were getting in the late 1990’s. How many thought the High Line was a massive asset?
OK, I see they do have a sculpture park- where my artist friend Kim Beck recently did a project.
http://www.imamuseum.org/visit/100acres
A 100 acre urban sculpture park is pretty unique and should be developed and marketed more widely.
Yes, John. I specifically mentioned IMA’s 100 Acres (Art and Nature Park) in my list of things I’d send/take an out-of-towner to visit. Beyond that, they have preserved the Lilly Oldfields mansion as a house museum, along with significant parts of the original landscape (including a grand allee that is the site of the annual Penrod Arts Fair, see https://www.google.com/maps/@39.828053,-86.18427,3a,75y,287.74h,90.05t/data=!3m5!1e1!3m3!1sfFwLd77TIt2N23QBvZZf0w!2e0!3e5?hl=en )
I live in Louisville, though I am not from there – grew up in the Rust Belt and spent my 20’s in Georgia and Alabama. So I’ve seen midwestern, and I’ve seen Deep South. The author has misdiagnosed why Louisville and Indianapolis are different, in my opinion.
Louisville is not in any way aristocratic. It was never part of the Confederacy. It was not premised on a planter economy. Millionaire’s Row are virtually all out of towners. It has always been a river, border city, which has encouraged a constant influx of people and immigrants over the years. As a result, it sort of sits to the side by itself, not really being “of” Kentucky or Indiana. There is a strong live-and-let-live vibe in Louisville which is more tolerant of different types of people and lifestyles than other places, and I don’t mean just race and sexual orientation, I mean – people who are just *different.* One thing I love about Louisville is that you have diehard Catholics, megachurch people, atheists, etc. all sort of doing their thing. I think my point is – it’s sort of an eclectic middle of the country kind of place that is really affordable, which encourages artists, foodies, musicians, etc. in the region to make their home here.
I know far less about Indianapolis, but it seems to me Indianapolis is the true center city of Indiana, and really represents the culture and spirit of the state more uniformly in ways Louisville does not for Kentucky. I have always seen Indy as a clean, nice, corporate-friendly city. It developed much later than Louisville did and does not have as many idiosycracies with respect to the development of neighborhoods, property ownership, etc.
In any event, a foodie culture grows organically – you need the people as well as an “eating out” culture that supports both the nice restaurants as well as the more standard regular fare. It’s kind of ironic that Louisville – home to KFC, Taco Bell, Pizza Hut, and Papa John’s – has room for the Zagat’s type places as well. I guess we just like to eat more than you all.
JC, I know very little of Louisville despite living just 125 miles away in Indy’s northern suburbs. Your description of Louisville, if true, reminds me of what struck me about Los Angeles during the six years I lived there (until three years ago). Having come from Indiana’s mono-culture, I loved the lack of one dominant culture and of the general laid-back attitude of most Los Angelenos. Even though there is a segregation of sorts in where people live, there is a rich diversity of ethnicities and world outlooks that seems to meld and shape the city’s overall culture.
Indianapolis, not so much. Still, it has a more diverse culture than when I first moved here 30 years ago and it is evolving quickly. The people are friendly (a good Midwestern trait) and increasingly open to embracing change and a new world order (witness the views on gay marriage, the need for mass transit, the explosion of local mini-breweries, more robust criticism of mediocre architectural proposals for new buildings, etc.).
The influx of immigrants and other outsiders has helped Indy to evolve, as well as other factors such as technology and the explosion of the information age. But still, change is hard. Competition on a global scale is forcing Indy (and every other city we’ve discussed) to rethink its place in the world and consider new strategies. Those that adapt, who can rise above their good-is-good-enough roots, will have the best chance for success.
Whether we agree with Aaron’s take on some of the factors that got us here is not as important as the willingness to be introspective and to ask the tough questions about our cultural underpinnings. Every viewpoint has merit and that richness of thought and critical thinking (as demonstrated here) is what can help Indy, Louisville, Columbus, Cincinnati and all the rest move forward.
Is that yet another trait inherent in the Midwest ethos? Let’s hope so.
“This is where the “market” of reputation comes in.”
unfortunately reputation is built as much on misconception and hearsay as it is on objective evaluation, particularly when it comes to public opinion of the south and midwest. I don’t know about Urban Spoon, but Yelp is hardly objective as proprietors of businesses can pay to have unfavorable reviews suppressed.
JC hit on something Aaron suggested for Louisville: play up the river city openness and become a “sin city” with a focus on bourbon and tobacco among other things. Maybe that has happened with food already.
Not having IMA and 100 acres closer to downtown is unfortunate.
The basic question raised here is why some places are more sophisticated than others.
“Not having IMA and 100 acres closer to downtown is unfortunate.”
I tend to agree that a perhaps smaller museum integrated into downtown would be better for Indy. However, a sculpture park makes the most of the museum’s unique setting.
The Queens Museum in NYC should also seriously consider creating a high quality sculpture park- something few other area museums could do.
100 acres is one of the few attractions that would draw me to Indy. Two artists I know, Julianne Swartz & Kim Beck did projects at IMA or 100 acres.
An over 100 acre contemporary sculpture park near a downtown is pretty unique. The focus on temporary projects makes it more so.
That being said, the IMA is struggling with significant financial problems.
Looking at metro Indy, outside of the NE sector, there is still a strong agrarian presence and mentality and that affects how big of a base you have of people willing to go downtown to overspend on high end or experimental food. Indy is an eggs, steak and potatoes kind of town. Nothing wrong with that, a Federalist, agrarian history should be viewed more highly than an aristocrat, antebellum history based on the backs of slaves.
Provence, Tuscany & Greece and most of Mexico are mostly agrarian but they are hardly known for bland, boring food. Quality doesn’t = “high end”.
Columbus, Indiana’s architecture program actually didn’t cost that much more than the average alternative.
That being said my guess is that there is a lot of regional specialization. Perhaps Indy’s high end dining base is partly sated by trips to Chicago, Louisville & Cincinnati?
I don’t agree that cities are hurt by proximity, but there is a need to focus on niches and natural strengths.
Funny how, Indy which has spent more than most regional cities on building tourist attractions and convention facilities is known for being bland- and Louisville attracts.
Downtown Indy has been a created culture of sports entertainment revolving around a mall. It’s a breadth of fresh air getting into the Cultural Trail neighborhoods, which there doesn’t seem to be an organized effort or PPP focused on the retail and dining scene.
I will take it further. Probably the mega facilities undermine and detract from urbanism and other discretionary spending. The area closest to Pittsburgh’s stadiums is probably the blandest area in town.
Indy has used force to shift money into one sector and the city reflects that.
“Not having IMA and 100 acres closer to downtown is unfortunate.”
I tend to agree that a perhaps smaller museum integrated into downtown would be better for Indy. However, a sculpture park makes the most of the museum’s unique setting
There is a museum campus right downtown, which includes the Eiteljorg Museum (currently showing an Ansel Adams exhibit) and the Indiana State Museum, as well as the NCAA center. The Indianapolis Museum of Contemporary Art (IMOCA) is on the Cultural Trail in Fountain Square.
The Eiteljorg collection is focused on Western and Native American art, and includes contemporary pieces.
Sheesh. You’d think we were a bunch of uneducated, uncultured rubes from some of the things people have written here.
I’ll admit downtown Indy is not on par with Manhattan or Center City Philadelphia or the Loop in Chicago. It does not have an equal for Central Park NYC or the Ben Franklin Parkway in Philadelphia (with the Art Museum, Franklin Institute, Rodin Museum, and the New Barnes). But the city isn’t 400 years old, either. Let’s talk in 200 more years.
Lets talk in 200 years?
What is the average lifespan of facilities like Lucas Oil Stadium? If they last 30 years, its a miracle.
I wouldn’t call the Eiteljorg Museum downtown in any normal sense.
In typical Indy style, one sees a building isolated on grass surrounded by whizzing cars, massive parking garages and some kind off huge government complex.
Words have meaning and just having a building in a central location doesn’t mean it’s downtown. With the current design the building might as well be in a suburb since almost nobody is going to walk near it.
John, this is the danger of Google Maps touring. Use the pedestrian button; it’s an easy 15 minute walk to either the State Museum or the Eiteljorg on the Canal Walk or The Cultural Trail, both of which are separated paths for peds/cyclists. Both museums are easily accessible for pedestrians from the hotel cluster or cyclists using the bike-share. Both have cafes on or overlooking the Canal. One of the tallest buildings in the city (JW Marriott) is right across the street.
It’s downtown…just not NYC downtown or Boston downtown. More like the “City Beautiful” NW quadrant of Center City Philadelphia, which has museums and lots of lawns and cars whizzing by on the BF Parkway, or the downtown part of the Chicago lakefront, which has Grant and Millennium Parks with lawns, museums, and cars whizzing by on Lakeshore and Michigan.
The “lawn” at the Eiteljorg is actually the green roof of an underground parking structure. It’s a stormwater management feature.
Love Louisville. Definitely a foodie city. Indy? Concrete city…not fun.
This is way off Aaron’s topic. But…
The 200 years comment has to do with the relative age and stage of development relating to densification, not with any particular building. Lucas Oil Stadium is in a former industrial district at the edge of downtown…not in its core. Indianapolis just doesn’t have the same extent of densely-built environment as the nearby river cities (Cincinnati, Louisville, St. Louis), all of which are older settlements. It was a created and planned city of a mile square, laid out with broad streets and squares similar to Washington DC. There might be more modern (i.e. since 1980) condo-rowhouses than old ones here.
Most all of the old “gray belt” around downtown has been redeveloped or repurposed in the past 50-60 years; the stadiums are a comparatively small footprint. Examples of repurposing include 800 North Capitol and The Stutz Complex (and currently, some older low-midrise office buildings downtown being remodeled as apartments). The museums were built on old mill and factory sites dating back to the industrial uses along the Central Canal (water-power source) and White River (open sewer).
—
I think the development history of a place shapes its culture, too. This is a city of single-family homes with front and back yards, even in old downtown neighborhoods like Lockerbie Square, Chatham Arch and Ransom Place. Aaron has pointed out the “dining group” and backyard barbecue aspects in previous posts. I think this might contribute to a lower level of interest in higher end restaurant dining.
“Use the pedestrian button.”
Having to use a special button tells you that Indy’s “downtown” streets are not designed for pedestrians. Probably the term downtown just doesn’t apply anymore.
Terms like concrete and Neo-Fascist describe what one sees on street view.
This opinion is backed by the fact that Indy has one of the few large urban core’s still losing population. It also isn’t doing well as an employment center.
Chicago has great restaurants. But then as a trade hub it must have developed more sophisticated tastes.
Somebody told me Columbus has nice restaurants. They were viswiting Columbus on a business trip. But see also:
http://www.buzzfeed.com/kincairm/24-indisputable-reasons-that-columbus-has-the-best-a4wp
John, let’s not mix stories. The part of the “urban core” of Indianapolis losing population is outside the downtown, in the pre-WW2 wood-frame worker bungalows and foursquares. This is largely the ring 2-4 miles out from Monument Circle, toward the outer edge of the pre-Unigov (i.e. pre-1970) boundaries of the City of Indianapolis.
And the directions button on Google provides the choices (driving, transit, cycling, walking). When you press the walk button, you get walk time. My argument is simply that anything within 15 minutes walking distance of the center of a medium-sized city’s downtown is still downtown.
There are thousands of new residential units recently completed or under construction in the downtown and near-downtown areas of Indianapolis. The population of the actual downtown is rising, not falling. I’d direct you to a recent photo post on SSC: http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showpost.php?p=116024758&postcount=3231
—
Look, I think everyone gets that you prefer the built form of older, “legacy transit” US cities (NE corridor, SF, Chicago) and the old river cities (Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, Louisville, St. Louis, NOLA). But the US has lots of other medium to large metros, with different development patterns and built forms based on geography, then-modern infrastructure technology, and the dominant transportation mode when their growth phase happened. Even if you don’t consider them “real cities” and don’t want to live in them, they are there nonetheless, and 50-75% of “urbanized” Americans DO live in them (and drive cars most everywhere they go).
Calling the built form of an entire city “neo-fascist” after taking a Google Maps “walking” tour past the 80s-era “corporate plaza” addition to the State Government Center doesn’t really advance the discussion.
The more interesting question is why there aren’t more good restaurants right there…and the answer is that even though state employment is stable and pensioned, in Indiana it doesn’t pay particularly well. So the majority of state functionaries eat in one of the basement cafeterias that open onto the canal. This contrasts with the large Federal installations (Minton-Capehart building/Federal Courthouse downtown and the Defense Finance and Accounting Center at the former Fort Harrison). Both of those buildings have many outside lunch options around them; mostly non-chain or local-chain places downtown and more national and fast-food chains in suburban Lawrence.
“Anything within 15 minutes walking distance of the center of a medium-sized city’s downtown is still downtown.”
I would say that anything within 15 minutes walking distance of a downtown is – potentially part of it. It depends on the design. Would people walk for 15 minutes past the concrete super blocks in Indianapolis?
The design pretty much places these museums outside the downtown since almost everyone will drive to them.
One could take it further and say if people are driving from destination to destination- Indy doesn’t have a downtown but a disconnected group of parts in a central location.
Has anyone considered removing the Federal complex to Iraq’s Green Zone?
@May points out that Columbus’s food scene is not bad at all- and centers around mostly affordable places. Quality food & interest in experimentation is not always related to income.
The generalizations here seem to mostly apply to Indianapolis which does have enough income to support a much better scene. I can’t speak to what’s going on in places like Iowa.
@Chris Barnett
I probably have been too harsh about Indy.
There is now some substantial infill development- and the old core of the downtown was fairly walkable.
The point I am making is that up until recently most “investments” seem to have taken the city backwards. Almost every city went backwards 1960-1990 but Indy seems to be in denial about this.
Also, the city does not seem to be making any progress in changing the zoning in the areas around the downtown. Atlanta is building out miles of infill around the core.
@Chris Barnett
Seems to engage in a lot of partially accurate revisionist history.
Indy is not a very old city- but large parts of it were old. Historic districts date from 1860-1939 with a substantial amount dating from 1870-1920.
This is classic railroad and streetcar era design, most of it being highly walkable and transit oriented.
http://www.indygo.net/pages/local-transit-history
“Construction of the city’s first streetcar system began in 1864, employing horse-drawn cars and operating on 15 miles of track. The first electric streetcar hit the scene in 1890 and by 1898 there were 340 electric streetcars and more than 100 miles of track. The last electric streetcar was taken out of service in 1953.
In 1904, the Indianapolis Traction Terminal was built, making it the largest interurban station in the world. Interurbans were electric rail cars that ran between cities and were essentially extensions of existing streetcar systems. At its peak, the station served nearly 500 trains a day and 7 million passengers annually.”
Indy had a legacy to build on which it has undermined in recent years.
Aaron pushed the same myth when he described downtown pigeon shoots in the 1960’s.
Between 1920 and 1970 a lot of stuff happened that brought the downtown to that low point.
I also don’t by the idea that all these industrial districts lacked conversion potential. The remaining parts of the wholesale district speak to the high quality of construction.
Other industrial landmarks include the remains of the original Duesenberg factory and a great Art Deco Coca Cola plant.
Indy is old enough to have good bones. The problem is that more recent additions have mostly subtracted.
John Morris really nailed my pet peeve when he said this:
“‘Use the pedestrian button.’
Having to use a special button tells you that Indy’s ‘downtown’ streets are not designed for pedestrians.”
It’s not so much that the street design itself is anti-pedestrian; some of Indy’s best pedestrian design is actually downtown. But it definitely speaks to the longstanding mindset of the Administration and the City’s Department of Public Works that pedestrians are second-class citizens relegated to being accommodated only after the conveniences of drivers are served first. Anytime you must push a button to activate a pedestrian signal, it indicates that pedestrians are not really expected to be present with any frequency.
Imagine if drivers were always required to stop their cars and get out to push a button (or even just to roll down their windows and reach out to push a button) every time they approached an intersection. Of course, there’d be a mass revolt. But, if you pay attention, you can so often see pedestrians waiting to cross at a corner, even though the traffic signal is green, because they didn’t push the button before the light turned green, so they will have to wait entire cycle of the light to receive a pedestrian signal. Meanwhile, there might be plenty of time to cross with the green light, but they don’t know that because the ped signal tells them not to cross. It really saddens me. It saddens me more that virtually nobody in Indianapolis, and obviously nobody in the Administration, sees fit to change the policy of requiring push button activation everywhere except a select few blocks in the core (and maybe that will be converted as well).
So, how does this impact the dining scene in Indianapolis, if at all. I don’t know. As I said many posts back, I don’t know much about fine dining, but it does seem that such establishments are more often located in walkable, transit-served, urban locales rather than low-density areas with big parking lots in front. Perhaps it’s not just coincidence that Indy is seeing more upscale dining choices as walkable, urban neighborhoods like Fletcher Place & Fountain Square are being revitalized in conjunction with completion of the Cultural Trail, a nationally acclaimed improvement to the walking and biking atmosphere of these downtown-adjacent neighborhoods.
I wonder if development can orient itself around the cultural trail since this is often the only pedestrian friendly space.
Could this become the city’s “Low Line” much like NYC’s high line? Suppose some apartments and restaurants were built along it or with dual entrances?
Sadly I can’t seem to see most of the cultural trail on street view. (Terrible for the city to present its anti-pedestrian face)
Much of East Atlanta’s infill is orienting around the Belt Line walking & bike path.
http://www.frbatlanta.org/realestateanalytics/webstory_110714_beltline.cfm
At least one major Atlanta project will have an entrance along the Belt Line.
http://atlanta.curbed.com/archives/2014/06/12/new-beltlineponce-city-market-projects.php
Other nearby buildings seem to orient themselves to capture views of the path.
Until, Indy can tear down garages and Neo-Fascist government complexes- the best alternative may be to orient construction towards the pedestrian paths. The streets then basically serve as the overhead expressways government & team owners seems to want.
Public art and food truck parks can also help activate these spaces.
I think several people here are confusing the “pedestrian” button on Google Maps (and other navigation devices/software) which provides routes and directions suitable for those on foot rather than those in a car, with the walk button at signalized crosswalks and intersections, used to activate a pedestrian-crossing phase. And thereby talking past each other.
Generally, places where a button must be pressed to activation a pedestrian phase (which often means that a green light is held longer for parallel traffic, and crossing traffic endures a longer red phase) are not optimized for pedestrians. In a downtown, signals that are so designed are unfortunate.
But that’s nothing to do with Google maps.
Yes, I was referring to the software/ google maps navgation device. I thought @Chris Barnett knew some new pedestrian only map.
At various times Google has said it would include bike and pedestrian paths in Street View. This would be helpful in this section of downtown where the normal street grid is so uninviting.
@Paul Lambie’s comment reinforces my point that too many downtown streets are hostile to people and can’t function as normal streets.
@John Morris – Indy’s Cultural Trail is actually along the surface streets, so there’s no need for dual entrance designs unless buildings have parking lots behind them. The Cultural Trail, in most places, took a lane of traffic and turned into a curb separated bike trail. The bike trail and the sidewalks were enhanced with the use of decorative paving stones rather than the typical asphalt and concrete pavement of bike trails and sidewalks. Also, additional landscaping and more ped-scale lighting were included.
Unfortunately, in some places the Cult Trail consists of one path for pedestrians and bicyclists to share. If it were truly just a trail, that might work fine. But since it serves as the public sidewalk along downtown streets, that can certainly cause some safety and comfort problems, especially as more redevelopment causes those areas to be more frequently used.
The Virginia Avenue segment through the rejuvenating Fletcher Place & Fountain Square neighborhoods consists of separate paths. And the creation of the Trail narrowed the street pavement for Virginia Avenue providing for shorter, safer, more attractive crossings for pedestrians. Drivers appear to be starting to accept that traveling closer to 20MPH rather than 40MPH is appropriate and not the major inconvenience that some “accommodate cars as quickly as possible” types would rail on about.
John, you missed something important. You assume a preference in Indy for industrial conversions in the 50s and 60s (when many buildings were torn down and replaced by newer buildings or parking. No such preferences existed until the late 80s conversion of the Real Silk mills along College Avenue near Mass Ave. It did lead to some conversions in the Warehouse District later…after the downtown attractions were built.
It’s hard to get the point across to an outsider just how dead the downtown was by 1980 and how much money and effort have been invested since in an almost total rebuild. Of course the rebuilt core does not resemble one from 100 years ago. It was indeed built to accommodate the auto in a low transit era.
Whether it was an undisputed “good choice” to focus on after-5 activity centers downtown is no longer really debatable…it went on for the past 50 years. Downtown isn’t 24/7 like a megacity, and may never be. But several thousand new residents added over a few years will make a big difference.
And I suspect they will demand better dining options.
There is more of an entrepreneurial spirit in Louisville than in Indy — more risk takers. Not many in Indy take a chance on opening restaurant, and it leaves an open opportunity for the chain restaurants to rule the market in Indy.
“Not many in Indy take a chance on opening restaurant,”
Have any data to back up an assertion that a simple stroll through Mass Ave, Fountain Square, Fletcher Place, Near Northside, and other neighborhoods would tell you is currently not a true statement?
Do we have a lot of chain restaurants in the urban core?
You betcha. More than I would care for, but this is not completely unusual in major convention cities, nor is it to be completely unexpected given historical facts that many others have cited in their comments.
But go to any of the neighborhoods adjacent to the mile square and you find almost exclusively locally owned and established restaurants.
While I agree with Renn’s closing premise about mediocrity being too defining a value for too many in Indiana, I’m not sure I would use fine dining as the best standard-bearer for making the point.
“John, you missed something important. You assume a preference in Indy for industrial conversions in the 50s and 60s (when many buildings were torn down and replaced by newer buildings or parking.”
Wait a minute- your earlier quote described the removal of industrial buildings as entirely positive.
“The museums were built on old mill and factory sites dating back to the industrial uses along the Central Canal (water-power source) and White River (open sewer).”
The reality seems far more complex- and you admit that many buildings removed probably had conversion potential. Some are being converted.
http://www.coreredevelopment.com/apartments/harding-street-lofts/
Nobody doubts how dead the downtown became by the mid 1960’s. The big question is how it got there. Did ramming through expressways, removing housing and industrial areas near the downtown & destroying buildings for parking contribute to this? What role did mega facility mass convention strategy have in creating parking demand? (Similar to Baltimore)
Indy needs to be able to pull apart the conflicting forces and work from an accurate history. The downtown had a great street grid, many amazing buildings, nearby residential neighborhoods and streetcar layout.
The revisionist historians like 1965 as a starting point to evade their role in creating the dead downtown.
@Paul Lambie
“Indy’s Cultural Trail is actually along the surface streets, so there’s no need for dual entrance designs unless buildings have parking lots behind them.”
Isn’t there a big section off trail running along the industrial canal through the IUPUI campus and museum/ government complex area?
An 8 minute time lapse trail tour.
http://archive.indystar.com/VideoNetwork/2346785718001/Indianapolis-Cultural-Trail-10-000-still-frames-in-under-8-minutes
The trail seems to weave under several big streets right in a part of downtown very hostile to pedestrians.
I’m sorry, but as someone who hasn’t spent much time in the Midwest, I don’t know anything about the Cultural Trail. If you really want to advertise these things as “bragging rights”, you have to say what makes them outstanding.
I can’t speak to the statement that Louisville has better restaurants than Indianapolis. I do wonder when the last time that you had dinner in Indianapolis. There has been a lot happening in the Indianapolis restaurant scene over the last couple of years and is continuing to grow. There is a definite movement here for showcasing local sourced ingredients, which I think expresses a renewed interest to being more connected to place.
You need to eat at Bluebeard and have a drink at Libertine before you write Indianapolis off.
I will raise another grim issue- what effect has racism had in creating the downtown mono-culture?
We all know Indiana had a huge Klan history, which was not just a rural problem and was fully embedded in city and state politics. The Klan “protected” a white protestant mono-culture from exactly the type of “mixing” that seemed to be happening downtown.
Indy was not only eager to remove older industrial buildings but the dense inner city black community around them.
http://www.iupui.edu/~anthpm/WACgalleyfinal.pdf
“Indianapolis’ near-Westside declined significantly during the Depression and after the Second World War, and when federal funding for ‘slum clearance’ programs expanded in
the 1950s the community was significantly more over-populated, impoverished and black than it had been even twenty years earlier. That memory of a predominantly impoverished post-war neighborhood has led many contemporary Indianapolis residents to assume that the area was always an impoverished black ‘slum’. However, the area actually has had dynamic ethnic and class complexity over a century, and the swath of Indianapolis that UPUI now occupies always had pockets of many different European immigrant groups as
well as African Americans and white Indiana-born residents. As in many other contexts, though, Indianapolis’ post-war urban transformations were often rationalized by slum caricatures”
The Neo-Fascist government architecture, anti pedestrian street design and focus on approved sports mono-culture seems like an attempt to remove the messy, honest, urban aspects of the downtown.
The poor food scene probably reflects this fear of change, diversity and difference more than lack of income.
Not saying these motivations didn’t play a big role in government policy in a lot of cities. I do think, Indy is much less honest about its history.
It is amazing how odd people can get when online. The subject of the article was that much of Indianapolis’s outlook was “mediocre.” It was not about the “poor” state of our dining or otherwise. Mediocre is half-way between Poor and Great.
I, too, wonder whether food is an appropriate way to determine overall mediocrity. Indeed, Indianapolis has often been noted for doing things that most cities its size (metro area, of course) don’t. Yes, the Indianapolis 500. Why gloss over it? The Indianapolis Museum of Art, the Symphony, the Children’s Museum and the other stalwart “institutions” may not be grander than MOMA, the Met, Chigago Institute, etc. but they are awfully close. Mass Ave is not the Loop, our art scene, while “vibrant as they say, doesn’t have the critical mass of certain other cities. In short, we aren’t a Big City. Or Portland.
I really don’t want to come off as a “booster.” I, too, am frustrated with things like the AUL garage, our suburban sprawl (that is unique to us due to our geography), and the inability to return to the mass transit we once had. I can go on and on about our not-unique problem with education, crime, and low-wages. Having just spent the day in Columbus (IN) last week, I can definitely say that Indy comes off a bit poorer for the comparison — though a comparison of two unequally-sized cities is, of course, unfair.
So much of the conversation revolves around, “They did this. They did that.” At what point do “We” do something to make it the way we want?
Fortunately, many people do take part in not only the conversation, but actually doing something about it. They open restaurants (apparently, nothing approaching Louisville I guess) though I have enjoyed the dozens of non-franchised places Downtown (where I live). They open their own shops and businesses. They protest when a poorly conceived building is planned (and win or lose).
I apologize for this being something of a screed, but, really, why should anyone try to improve anything if they will be lambasted by everyone else — or don’t even live here. Frankly, the article is spot on in that we are often NOT a welcoming place for innovation. Many of the comments here rather prove it. One can only imagine what would have happened if Mies had decided to locate in Indianapolis. “Not another steel and window building. How Generic.” Our loss.
People have graded Indy’s food scene poorly relative to Louisville, Cincinnati, Columbus & Cleveland, regional cities of similar size
Importantly, the Indy of today also doesn’t compare well to its own past.
The city once had a great Jazz Music scene.
http://www.npr.org/blogs/ablogsupreme/2012/03/27/149474702/the-once-thriving-jazz-scene-of-indianapolis
“Today, few of the original buildings from Indiana Avenue’s glory days remain, save for the majestic Madame Walker Theater. Like many once-thriving black city neighborhoods, the area faded in the decades following WWII, a victim of interstate highway construction, “urban renewal” schemes and changing residential patterns. The clubs, the businesses and most of the people who inhabited the avenue at the height of its vitality are gone. But the influence of the era lingers, like light from a vanished star, in the artists who have come of age listening to the recordings of Johnson, Hubbard and Montgomery – and studying with David Baker.
While the contributions of those masters have been well-documented, the Indianapolis scene, like those of other major jazz centers, produced numerous other musicians who made the sound of mid-20th-century American jazz flourish. Organist Mel Rhyne, saxophonist David Young, trumpeter Virgil Jones, drummer Killer Ray Appleton and the Hampton Sisters are among those who made their mark, both in the city and beyond. Here are five recordings by other artists that further reflect the musical legacy of Indiana Avenue:”
The impression I get with the downtown is one of forced mediocrity oriented around mass sports, chain hotels and conventions.
Terms like “fascist”, concrete and “corporate” were used to describe a lot of recent construction.
IMHO, Indy probably has a lot more interesting stuff simmering beneath the surface but the city seems afraid of allowing organic growth to thrive.
I noted above that I don’t think food should be the determining factor as to whether or not an entire community is better or less than another community. I noted other examples, such as the arts, that, I believe, compares favorably to the cities you mentioned (old-line Cleveland, perhaps excepted).
As someone who uses a Wes Montgomery tune as his ringtone, I’m very aware of the history that jazz played in Indianapolis. The key two reasons for the decline of the Avenue are:
1. Fair Housing laws, which enabled African-Americans to move to any neighborhood.
2. The interstate and IUPUI construction that FOLLOWED the fair housing laws.
Many middle-class (and relatively wealthy) African-American families began moving to older and newer suburban areas following the enactment of fair housing laws (southern Butler-Tarkington and Meridian-Kessler, Fox Hill Road area, etc.).
Those citizens who were left behind tended to be the financially poorer members of the African-American community. From a cynical standpoint, it is always easier to declare an area blighted and use eminent domain when the population has fewer resources.
It’s an interesting topic you bring up, John Morris. You can’t force a community to live in the same area. One remembers Mayor Ballard’s desire to start up a Chinatown in Indianapolis. But beyond the snickers – do we force those of Chinese ancestry to live in a certain area? – we know he was well-meaning and simply wanted to figure out a way to have a sense of visible diversity.
If finances are not a problem, ethnic groups in Indianapolis disperse into the general population within two generations. We don’t have a Little Italy, a Germantown, or an Irish Hill anymore. Other cities do, but I’m not sure if that is a good thing or not. Is it better to have an Us vs. Them approach to residential living that neighborhoods like that engender or is it better to be a true melting pot?
Perhaps that is the real question when dealing with “mediocrity.”
I’m not sure I buy your story about fair housing laws fully. Clearly the decline of local industrial jobs was a factor.
Given that Indy was a peak Klan capital till almost 1930 could not have helped. Surely city leaders had plans to remove all or some of this community and blacks with options knew that.
I find it hard to believe that city administrations from 1930-1970 were not at least slightly racist.
“But beyond the snickers — do we force those of Chinese ancestry to live in a certain area? — we know he was well-meaning and simply wanted to figure out a way to have a sense of visible diversity.”
It wasn’t just that black residents moved away. Almost all the residential seems to have been removed, much of it for parking. (now, new housing has been built)
All I am saying is that knowing this history is important. Indy wasn’t entirely boring and it wasn’t designed around cars.
Recent downtown planning and urban renewal is connected to its racist history and seems to about creating a safe monoculture.
@John Morris – “Isn’t there a big section off trail running along the industrial canal through the IUPUI campus and museum/ government complex area?”
Yes, but that’s the Canal Walk that has been around for 15 years or so. It’s not considered part of the Cultural Trail that was all developed in the last 5 years or so. The Canal Walk is somewhat popular for recreation, but has been a failure in that the design of buildings along the Canal have mostly turned their back on it.
@Joegoalguy – “So much of the conversation revolves around, ‘They did this. They did that.’ At what point do ‘We’ do something to make it the way we want?”
By all means, do go ahead and change things. However, I wouldn’t be too critical of those pointing out the things that have been done wrong in the past, after all, you know, if we don’t remember our history… Perhaps more importantly, it seems very hard to make changes to city development policies to do things differently, the way “we” want it to be now in the 21st century, until there is an accepted consensus about what things we have been, and continue to do wrong. Many in power positions in Indy don’t see anything wrong with the way things have been done for decades, and they won’t likely change until you get change at the top, which will likely coincide with a larger voice of the populace complaining about the way things are being done.
“Yes, but that’s the Canal Walk that has been around for 15 years or so.”
Videos of the Cultural trail often show sections of what seems like the Canal Walk.
I wouldn’t call it a total failure. It seems lined with apartments with balconies facing the walk- many named after it. Given the very poor street face nearby, this is the key to development.
The next step might be some dining along the walk and entrances on it.
This fits with a new model of pedestrian oriented infrastructure like NY’s High Line & Atlanta’s Belt Line.
“Many in power positions in Indy don’t see anything wrong with the way things have been done for decades.”
Exactly, if I saw more honest self examination in Indy, I probably would move on from this subject.
Aaron – as someone that lived in the Midwest for 40 years, and has spent the last 4 in the Deep South, this is one of the best accounts I’ve read of the differences. I think, like you, I admire the many qualities of the people in the Midwest. But it’s also immensely frustrating how quickly those same people embrace mediocrity in just about everything. In the world of the built environment, an average house/park/street/etc in just about any southern town or city is better than nearly all of the best in the Midwest. I fully believe it derives from that aristocratic tradition and a reverence for excellence in beauty. I’ve seen first-hand here in Savannah how residents will tear apart a building design that my friends in the Midwest would happily accept. And yet, as you noted, that aristocratic tradition also has a dark side not to be ignored.
I do take exception to the comment about education – my experience is more like one of the commenters that education and doing well in school is highly valued (the tie-in to a solid work ethic). At the same time, there is cynicism toward the best of the best in education, especially if you think of Ivy League schools. But still, I think education is much more highly valued in the Midwest than in the South for the average person.
@Kevin
Have you really traveled around the South much? Is Charlotte or Houston a center of design excellence? Savannah is closer to the exception than the rule.
Seems like a pretty mixed bag. Aristocratic culture of that type no longer dominates the South.
“In the world of the built environment, an average house/park/street/etc in just about any southern town or city is better than nearly all of the best in the Midwest.”
This doesn’t ring remotely true.
@John Morris
Yes, I have traveled extensively. Charlotte compared to what? Indy, Omaha, or KC? Charlotte is far better. Compared to Savannah or Charleston? No, not at all. Houston? I personally don’t consider Texas to be “the South” – it’s a region unique to itself. While it shares much in common with the southeast, it also has many important differences. When we speak of “the South” what we really means is the southeast.
As to the culture, to say it no longer dominates, well, let’s just agree to disagree.
That being said, a lot of Southern City’s once known for ugly sprawl and anti-urban design have stepped up their game.
I was really impressed by the slice of Atlanta I saw and hope to go back and explore. Some recent infill showed more quality, creativity and sensitivity than I expected.
Eastern & Midwestern city’s like Chicago or Cincinnati can’t assume a monopoly on livable urbanism alone will be enough.
@Kevin
Well, if you are willing to divide the South, from the Southeast, from Texas, perhaps you should take a more nuanced look at The Midwest?
Does this apply to Cincinnati, Chicago, Minneapolis?
I am sort of willing to say that Indy seems to be a center for bad, generic architecture. But clearly the city has enough great design to show this was not always the case.
Cincinnati also has an overlay of generic, grim, mediocrity.
Atlanta’s Buckhead is probably the largest mass of bad taste I have seen in one place.
For years I’ve noted with curiosity how so many people in Indiana are not only uneducated but just plain ignorant, intentionally, yet proud of it. They ridicule those that have risen above their surroundings and become “too big for their britches”.
In many areas of the state mediocrity is something to shoot for since they start out so far below average.
This article helps explain part of the problem. Now, if there was just a solution but I wouldn’t hold my breath for that.
Lucas Oil Stadium, the Monument to Misplaced Priorities, sucked about a Billion $ from better uses around this city but our politicians fear losing their precious football team and the so-called prestige it brings. This is the kind of thinking that keeps us mediocre, and that’s on a good day.
I’m not convinced of the superiority of the South but I’m certain of the inferiority of the Midwest and Indy.
I think the negative reaction the reaction to an aristocratic class is not exclusively anti-intellectual. Ingrained in the american ideal or myth(depending how cynical you are feeling) is that you can through work and effort move up through various economic statuses. An aristocratic class indicates an sealed off class system where you are more likely to remain in the class that you are born into.
@williampotter:
You get to the heart of the issue. The region has a blue class culture, but has lost the jobs that gave that culture its independence. Same with the wood products towns here in the Northwest. Education didn’t matter when a high school degree was all that mattered, basically satisfying ones parents, but “sophistication”, especially in food, is now a sign of having made it, and a lot of people haven’t.
“Lucas Oil Stadium, the Monument to Misplaced Priorities, sucked about a Billion $ from better uses around this city but our politicians fear losing their precious football team.”
Its not that everything in Indy is mediocre, but Indy’s public face that politicians and public leaders have forced on the city is a display of gigantic blandness.
I would argue that far more people nationally know Lucas Oil Stadium than Monument Circle. Indy’s parking garages have the scale of city landmarks.
In order to do that, they have worked to undermine knowledge of the city’s history. It wasn’t just a cow town. It had a great basic street design, many landmarks and the roots of a great jazz scene.
“I’m not convinced of the superiority of the South but I’m certain of the inferiority of the Midwest and Indy.”
I’m not goona go there since I haven’t seen enough of the South.
One thing I have noticed is that it seems to have many great old places that are not appreciated.
We were just in Covington, Kentucky- just across the Ohio from Cincinnati. One would be hard pressed to find a larger intact mass of historic streets. It’s not in terrible shape, but the main shopping street is largely empty.
I assume, most people live in some suburban area nearby- which I strongly doubt is in the same league.
Richmond, also seemed a grim shadow with many unloved buildings. Greensboro, North Carolina had a largely empty, high quality downtown.
The idea that the South is universally obsessed with heritage or quality of place doesn’t match with what I have seen. This doesn’t seem related to wealth, since a lot of poor West Virginia communities show more of it.
I was down in “NuLu” a few weeks ago and spent $25 on fried chicken at Harvest. It was overcooked and the gravy tasted like a melted salt lick. But what do I know? I’m just a proudly-uneducated, mediocre Hoosier with no appreciation for anything excellent,.
Louisville’s hideous waterfront highway isn’t exactly setting a high standard either.
In both cities/ states we have governments working to impose low quality projects that subtract value. Indiana is paying for a Kentucky highway project to spread the mediocrity.
I *generally* agree with Aaron’s points about dining in Louisville vs. Indy, but I think the differences between the cities are more nuanced than in his description.
95% of the restaurants in Louisville and Indy are interchangeable, consisting of chains or independent places serving uninteresting breakfasts, brunches, or pub food.
The difference lies in the good, interesting, independent restaurants. Compared to Indy, a disproportionate number of of good independent restaurants in Louisville are of the fine dining, white tablecloth, $50 per person (or more) restaurants. Traditional somewhat formal sit down restaurants where you may not where a suit, but you might wonder if you should have.
L’Ex was like this, but most of the restaurants in this space in Indy are chains or steakhouses. Good, high-end chains (Oceanaire, Seasons 52, etc.), but still chains.
Indy does have a good, strong, independent restaurant scene, but it is much more gastropub than formal restaurant. Think Recess, Black Market, Napolese, Pizzology (yes), Brugge, Oakley’s bistro, etc. These aren’t mediocre by any means, and they tend to use fresh, interesting, and often local ingredients. They are as good as or better than any *comparable* restaurants in any other city in the US.
But they are not “fine dining” restaurants of the white tablecloth French-influenced variety that is much more common in Louisville. At Black Market (as an example), you can get a solid half chicken or roasted lamb, both from local producers. But you won’t get duck liver pate or the kind of complex meals you can get at, say, Lilly’s in Louisville.
And I think Aaron is right about the reasons for the dichotomy. Although, I will point out again that I don’t think “mediocre” is the right word to describe restaurants in Indy; I don’t think you can get a better pizza than Napolese in Louisville, and I’m not sure that anyplace in Louisville would prepare the dishes at Black Market any better than Black Market does.
But the category of independent fine-dining restaurants in Indy is almost empty.
Cincinnati’s Gateway Quarter, go ahead and count the restaurants along Vine from 12th to 14th- http://otrmatters.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/Over-the-Rhine-Wayfinding-Map.png
I was very impressed with that area.
@Eric F
I was reading about how many of New Orleans’s very high end white table restaurants are closing. There seems to be an overall shift towards casual but quality food- gastro-pubs, experimental food, ethnic influence.
If anything, Louisville seems old aristocratic culture seems like a throw back.
The problem I have with Indy, is the city & state seem to push policies that subsidize mediocrity and probably undercut organic culture. (influenced from what I have seen in Cleveland)
An article from 2013 talks about raising entertainment taxes & imposing a 17% tax on car rentals. Most of this money flows towards Lucas Oil stadium, the convention center & downtown garage maintenance.
http://www.ibj.com/city-set-to-hike-entertainment-visitor-taxes/PARAMS/article/38885
I don’t know if they passed an increase or how these taxes break down. Are music venue tickets & cover charges taxed at a high rate like they are in Cleveland? Is there a special restaurant or liquor tax?
Cleveland’s taxes have worked to shift money away from grass roots venues like The Beachland Ballroom & Happy Dog frequented by locals towards approved mega venues. The recent Sin Tax debate exposed an emerging fault line.
My guess is a culture war may emerge between residents living near the downtown, small business owners and the moocher crony capitalist, hotel and stadium interests.
These restaurant tax rate charts from 2012 are probably relevant.
Overall there seems to be no major link between rates and healthy food scenes. NYC, DC & LA all have pretty high rates. Chicago diners are hit with a close to 11% rate.
However, when compared to smaller regional cities considered to have stronger food scene’s Indy’s 9% rate seems pretty high.
Columbus, Ohio has a ……..6.75% combined meal tax
Louisville, Kentucky ……..6 %
Cleveland, Ohio ………….7.5 %
Milwaukee, Wisconsin……… 5.75 %
This money is coming from somewhere – including the quality of food and service available.
I don’t have the liquor tax figures which are an even more important factor in the average bottom line.
Here is the chart link.
http://taxfoundation.org/article/meals-taxes-major-us-cities-0
One meal at a French-ish restaurant in Louisville proves the inarguable superiority of the Louisville restaurant scene? And “fancy” restaurants are the standard for the argument here? And a city not embarrassed by the excesses of its proud elite class makes it better? Give me a break. How about we celebrate the fact that Indianapolis has MUCH better restaurants than it probably has ever had in its history. If you can’t enjoy the food at Plow and Anchor, Black Market, Bluebeard, The Local, 10-01 Food & Drink, Peterson’s, Recess, Taste, the Libertine, and about two dozen other high quality eateries without pining for some other better city where they’re eating fancier food, then you’re a sad, sad person. What is the point of stating unequivocally that one small-city scene is better than another? Let’s be glad that food in almost all places except the cities with the most entrenched scenes has improved dramatically over the last few years and call it a f***ing day!
I almost have to laugh. Terry sums up the Hoosier/Midwest mentality perfectly. Don’t dare compare yourself against elsewhere, and if you say you want better for your city, you’re the problem and should shut up and celebrate what we have. It’s the active disparagement of the pursuit of excellence.
And L’Explorateur had white tablecloths, but it was very low key and not that “fancy.” The service, while generally good, certainly didn’t have the formality of old-guard French restaurants. I didn’t men in suits and ladies with hates there. Plenty of jeans and polos. Plow and Anchor is at least as fancy now. But it’s such a small and irrelevant point. Frankly, I like Neal’s decor and concept better at the Libertine. And the food is so much more consistently good there. Maybe the high points were better at L’Ex, but it’s more playful and hearty and approachable at the Libertine. I think people in other cities would be laughing at us for being so stuck on “fancy” as the standard for good food.
Go to every restaurant in Louisville–instead of one–over a period of several months with lots of specific evidence (you offer NONE about your meal) and then get back with me! Comparisons are fine and good, and we should definitely strive for excellence. But your argument is seriously lacking in specific evidence that would actually make it credible.
Turns out they did pass the 2013 tax increase. Hotel, car rental and entertainment taxes are close to the highest in the nation.
http://www.wthr.com/story/20547390/car-rental-ticket-tax-rates-jump-in-indianapolis
If this works the way it often does, the smaller venues get slammed by these taxes. The large ones are mostly taxing their own revenue streams to pay for subsidies to themselves.
I think the combined tax on restaurant meals in Indy is now 10% which is in the top 2 or 3 in the country.
By the way John & Co., did I not say “bistro type place”? The implication being that this restaurant is not a stuff haute cuisine type of place.
The web site is here and you’ll note the lack of white tablecloths, if that matters to you: http://www.coopbistro.com/
I didn’t think Terry was disparaging the pursuit of excellence — he was merely defending the food scene in the city by citing nine restaurants that do pursue excellence in response to your measly one little restaurant as proof of Louisville’s superiority. I don’t think anyone said that they didn’t want better for their city, whatever that city is.
Parsifal, I’ve seen that same basic comment many times before on places like the IBJ message boards. Dare to suggest that a taxpayer subsidized stinkbomb should have better architecture and you’ll hear same basic line of “Who are you to judge? / It’s better than what was there before / You should be thankful for what you’re getting.” The entire point is to denigrate calling out average (or worse) as well as to somehow cut down the person who says things could or should be better. NB the follow-up demand: “Go to every restaurant in Louisville—instead of one—over a period of several months with lots of specific evidence (you offer NONE about your meal) and then get back with me!”
“Better than its ever been.” might be one of the world’s dumbest expressions.
The human lifespan is far too short to allow a full perspective on things.
Hence, the starting point for Indy are comparisons to memories of the downtown 1965-1970.
This short memory, lack of perspective plays a big role in urban history. How many people alive in Indy can remember its Jazz scene? How many people in Pittsburgh personally remember a vibrant Hill District? (Luckily we have over 80,000 Teenie Harris photos to show what was there.) Look how shocked people are by the video of downtown Dallas in 1939.
If anyone believes that the evidence given about the quality of restaurants in Louisville in the original post was anything close to comprehensive, please raise your hand.
I’m not saying Indy is the best city on the planet. I’m not saying it’s even better than Louisville. I’m not saying Indy always strives for excellence or that we should put up with the crap we’ve got and be happy with it. The suggestion that I am is utterly patronizing.
What I’m saying is that restaurants are more than white tablecloths. And that Urbanophile could do much better than this post at showing that. And I’d welcome that post.
@Terry
I am closer to agreeing with you, Aaron doesn’t provide enough info to back such a sweeping conclusion about Indy and certainly not the broad Midwest.
But I do think public policy in Indy seems to push towards mediocrity. A 10% restaurant tax which funnels large amounts of money to a few government approved mass attractions has to be undermining the food scene. Surely all of Indy’s restaurants don’t benefit from these attractions equally- many don’t benefit at all.
Cincinnati also has a pretty high sales tax that partly subsidizes stadiums. It probably should have a much stronger food scene.
Underlying these policies is a very negative view of these cities and their organic potential.
John, the restaurant tax in Indianapolis is only 2% extra above the regular 7% state sales tax. Several of the suburban counties have a 1% tax.
If they haven’t changed.
Columbus, Ohio has a ……..6.75% combined meal tax
Louisville, Kentucky ……..6 %
Cleveland, Ohio ………….7.5 %
Milwaukee, Wisconsin……… 5.75 %
Only Cincinnati & Chicago are regional cities in the same territory.
What effect do these taxes have? My guess is Indy they tend to shift money away from organic neighborhood restaurants towards sports bars & chain restaurants near downtown.
Louisville seems to still have a 6% sales ta on restaurant meals compared to Indianapolis’s 9%.
Even though they didn’t push it to 10%, Indy is 3% higher. That $ either is passed along to customers or reflected in lower quality. Still looming out there are proposals to further increase rates.
Interestingly, Portland, Oregon has no sales tax at all.
This supports the general theory that Indy’s entertainment spending is not growing as much as being shifted towards certain sectors like mega sports.
1. Sales tax is added to the bill in Indiana, just as it is everywhere else. When I am out for a $50/person dinner, the difference between $3.50 and $4.50 in tax doesn’t really figure in. In this instance a dining out tax isn’t regressive to the extent that a general sales tax is.
2. When deciding where to eat out in Indiana, restaurants in Columbus, Cincinnati, and Louisville are not part of the equation so the relative tax rates are irrelevant.
3. Columbus, Cincinnati, and Louisville all have taxpayer financed stadia too; in Columbus’ case it’s one of the largest in the world. Neither taxes nor stadia are “the reason” Aaron perceived a difference in the Indy vs. Louisville dining scenes. Please give it a rest.
Ultimately the taxes are part of what the customer has to pay. If the owner doesn’t think they can increase prices too high they have to cut quality or service to compensate.
Indy also has among the highest hotel and car rental taxes in the nation.
A large part of this money has been shifted into one area- the public face of Indy is a landscape of gigantic stadiums, garages and generic, large hotels.
All of this is based on the self fulfilling myth that the city never had -or could have anything that would attract people- that Indy restaurants or entertainment venues couldn’t be great on their own.
John, Indy residents don’t typically pay hotel or car rental taxes. We live in homes here and drive our own cars. Again, this is irrelevant to restaurant quality.
Both Louisville and Indianapolis have taxpayer-financed stadia, so that’s not a difference-maker in restaurant quality or food culture either.
As Aaron points out, Louisville is home to more fast-food chains than Indy. Indy has Steak ‘n’ Shake. Louisville has the Kentucky Fried/Taco Bell/Pizza Hut conglomerate plus Papa John’s. Does this say something about restaurant quality or food culture?
Non of these policies in any of these cities is wise, but Indy is the poster child of mega a city core oriented/ distorted/ controled by anti-urban mega facilities.
This is the public face of Indianapolis people will see.
http://www.urbanindy.com/2014/07/15/oneamerica-parking-garage-the-story/
You can’t have it both ways, only praising the alleged benefits of this without looking at the possible downside. Shifting that many resources into one area has effects.
Your version of Indy history is highly distorted. The original city plan was not designed around highways. No it wasn’t designed as Manhattan – more like Paris or Berlin.
Moreover, the plan has not payed off- meaning that Indy restaurant & small business owners should expect another big wave of hotel, restaurant, liquor or entertainment taxes.
http://www.chron.com/news/article/Indianapolis-mayor-backs-tax-to-hire-more-officers-5656950.php
“Mayor Greg Ballard said the plan wouldn’t be an overnight fix for the capital city, which with 80 homicides so far this year could be on track to rival 1998, when the city saw a record 162 killings. But the mayor said his plan would help address some of the root causes of crime in the city, in part by expanding preschool access and fighting the high school drop-out rate.
Ballard is asking for a .15 percent increase in the city’s public safety income tax, which would boost the tax to .50 percent. That amounts to about $5.32 a month for the average household in Indianapolis, where the median annual income is $42,063, and will enable the city to increase its police staffing to 1,677 officers by 2018, the mayor’s office said.”
Originally, they planned to raise the restaurant sales tax to 10%. Who knows what else is coming?
@Chris… What publicly-financed stadia does Columbus have?
Crew Stadium was privately built and privately owned.
Nationwide Arena is funded, in part, by taxes on casino revenue, not a general public tax.
Huntington Park was built with a mix of public-private funding, but does not require any public subsidy.
The only places left are part of OSU, and it’s sporting revenues, especially from football, are in the black.
I find it hard to believe OSU’s football stadium pays for itself. Could you offer some proof?
Even so, OSU seems to be seeing a pretty huge surge in apartment construction near the field, increasing the % of people who walk to games or take transit. I assume there are game day shuttles.
Few cities in America have distorted their urban structure around mega attractions like Indy. Baltimore might be the closest comparison.
In terms of history, I think Atlanta makes a pretty good comparison to Indy.
Both cities started to grow in the 1870-1900 period. The “golden age of Indianapolis” is considered the 1900-1930 period which fits Atlanta’s history. Both had extensive street car networks.
Both cities were known for racial division & both cities had an industrial belt near the downtown.
But, Atlanta is doing much better at filling that former industrial belt with pedestrian oriented infill.
“AMLI Ponce Park
AMLI’s newest complex, featuring 305 one-and-two bedroom units, is at 641 North Ave. just steps from the BeltLine. It’s expected to open in July.
“Bohemian House
Dubbed BoHoO4W, the 276-unit one-and-two bedroom apartment building at 477 Wilmer St. (off Glenn Iris Drive) held its grand opening in May.
The Flats at PCM
The exclusive 259 residential units at Ponce City Market building in the Old Fourth Ward include original details such as steel sash windows, exposed ceilings, architectural columns and European-style kitchens. Leasing is underway and move-ins are expected to begin in the fall.
755 North
The latest development from Perennial Properties is being built on a hillside above The Masquerade and adjacent to the BeltLine at the corner of North Avenue and Somersett Terrace. Move-ins are expected to begin at the 228-unit building in August.
Atlanta Daily World Building
Gene Kansas Commercial Real Estate has announced it will renovate the historic Atlanta Daily World newspaper building on Auburn Avenue into apartments and street-level retail. The apartments could be ready by fall.
Alexan at Krog Street
Trammel Crow Residential is building this 222-unit apartment building on the Eastside Trail of the BeltLine adjacent to the Stove Works. The apartments will be completed in summer 2015, and you’ll be able to walk across the street to Krog Street Market.”
…..
See the entire huge list.
http://www.atlantaintownpaper.com/2014/06/renters-market-apartment-boom-continues-intown/
Living in Minnesota and from Indy originally. I wish the arguement about restaraunts would cease. Aaron is so right about mediocraty in Central Indiana especially. People in Indy never had an identity and still don’t. As for groking Minnesota Aaron. It’s like this. People embrace outdoor activities. Fishing and hunting are popular. Hiking, boating, biking, running, camping. And winter sports too! Cross country ski, downhill, snowboard.,ice fishing. By taking advantage of the natural resources Minnesota has the people living here are really living. But then again it goes beyond just the outdoors. We take care of our own. And we have problems too. All the urban problems Aaron notes are here in the Twin Cities and small cities. Luckily I’m a resident now of Duluth. There are no fine dinning or good middle of the road places to eat. But we do have a few diners and roadhouses up the shore and in the county. Best we can offer is to eat well at home and play alot outside.
“People in Indy never had an identity and still don’t.”
If you are under 150 years old, you probably can’t support that statement.
The basic design of the old city has glimpses of real quality and care.
The underlying idea behind the centrally controlled development strategy is that Indy has no identity (cow town) of value- and one needs to be imposed on it.
Was it ever true, or has this policy of ripping apart neighborhoods and funneling resources into one area undermined cultural growth?
This is a little off topic, but some of John’s comments regarding the urban development focused on sports stadiums and mage-structures remind me of what I thought was a stunning quote by Mayor Ballard in a July 21, 2009 expression of interest that ultimately resulted in the privatization of the Indy water and sewerage treatment systems:
“Indianapolis, like many large cities today, faces massive funding challenges related to maintaining its basic infrastructure. The estimated cost to bring our City’s infrastructure to a fair condition exceeds $5 billion. It is estimated that over $4 billion is needed for improvements to the City’s waterworks utility system (“Waterworks”) and wastewater utility system (“Wastewater”) and $1.5 billion for other basic infrastructure projects (roads, bridges, sidewalks and parks).”
“With unparalleled public and private sector support, the City has made significant investments recently in important, high-profile facilities. Our field house for basketball, new international airport, new football stadium, and expanding convention center are the result of investments in excess of $3 billion by our community. These noteworthy facilities are important investments that must be maintained, but the high-profile nature of such facilities must not distract us from the need to invest in our basic infrastructure: our roads, bridges, sidewalks, parks, and Waterworks and Wastewater systems.”
Wow. Bold words. No doubt the Mayor is correct that it may be important for a city to invest in basic infrastructure, and not just other “important investments” like sports facilities.
I like Indy, and think the city exudes a positive energy. But my impression has long been that the City sold its soul to both the mega-sprawl and mega-structure “urban success” models, and that there would be hell to pay at some point. The bill for some of the neglected infrastructure is already coming due, with residents facing water and sewer rates that will double or triple from 2009-2025, and go from some of the lowest to among the highest in the US.
David,
Portland has had the same doubling or tripling of rates, largely as a result of annexation. Fifty year ago, people wanting to avoid paying the higher hook-up rates of the City of Portland went outside the city limits, where they could build with septic fields. When the City annexed those areas ten or 15 years ago, existing customers in the sewer and water utilities subsidized those new connections. The City thought it was doing a good thing annexing those first ring suburbs to become larger, since it had seen new investment go there in the past. Those older suburbs have become poor, dilapitated, and needed of basic upgrades like paved roads, and the most recent generation of young people don’t want to live there, preferring instead the center city, where they are reinvesting in old houses and sparking a rebirth in commercial development. The center city thought it needed to be big to survive. Financially, it might have been better to go it alone. The question is whether it needed to rescue those neighbors to keep them from pulling it down. In terms of fairness, the state should have either mandated the upgrades, taking the cost out of the value of the homes, or provided a region-wide subsidy, not one just from the center city.
There is a very interesting and very short book on this subject, written by the former mayor of Albuquerque, called “Cities Without Suburbs”. The basic thesis is that the creation of numerous municipalities and special service districts has created inefficient and inequitable financing metro-wide.
Indy is seeing a range of tax hikes from property to sales. The state also has had to chip in money from a big liquor tax increase.
Manhattan is the opposite- 22.9 square miles of land pretty much subsidize the rest of the city.
I think it was Hammond Indiana that chose handouts to Cabela’s over flood control.
Sorry, I was wrong. Looks like the plan to double state liquor taxes to funnel money into Indy’s sports stadiums was killed.
Most articles bring up the same theme. The city has used $$ from basic services and infrastructure for stadiums & now needs to hike taxes. The ROI from these “investments” is so great they always need more money to be kept afloat.
The Guardian has a long article about the UK’s recent discovery of midwestern food.
http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2014/aug/05/haute-dogs-fried-pickles-savoury-doughnuts-how-britain-fell-love-midwestern-food?CMP=twt_gu
The argument that the restaurants of Indianapolis are inferior to those of Louisville because the democratic social state of the midwest compels its residents to eschew excellence in favor of contently wallowing in mediocrity strikes me as laughably culturally tone deaf. While it would be difficult to deny that the culture of Louisville is more influenced by aristocracy than the culture of Indianapolis, claiming that this is the reason that Indianapolis trails Louisville in culinary excellence, and that Indianapolis would have it no other way (!), is inept at best. I would challenge you to find a single potential patron of L’Ex who never dined there because the ensuing “opprobrium of the community” would have been too much to bear.
It might be a bit extreme to imply the Big Ten is all about academic excellence at the expense of Southern colleges. Duke is in the South and has academic standards as high (or much higher) than most Big 10 schools and had a longer track record of excellence than any Big 10 school in basketball (save possibly for Indiana). Ohio State and Penn State have had their share of scandal lately. What’s the difference anyway? Most major college football players are in school for the game, an education is secondary by evidence of all the early withdrawals to the NFL.