The New Brooklyn: What It Takes to Bring a City Back

by Kay S. Hymowitz

Featured in The New York Times Book Review Only a few decades ago, the Brooklyn stereotype well known to Americans was typified by television programs such as "The Honeymooners" and "Welcome Back, Kotter"--comedies about working-class sensibilities, deprivation, and struggles. Today, the borough across the East River from Manhattan is home to trendsetters, celebrities, and enough "1 percenters" to draw the Occupy Wall Street protests across the Brooklyn Bridge. "Tres Brooklyn," has become a compliment among gourmands in Parisian restaurants. In The New Brooklyn, Kay Hymowitz chronicles the dramatic transformation of the once crumbling borough. Devoting separate chapters to Park Slope, Williamsburg, Bed Stuy and the Brooklyn Navy Yard, Hymowitz identifies the government policies and young, educated white and black middle class enclaves responsible for creating thousands of new businesses, safe and lively streets, and one of the most desirable urban environments in the world. Exploring Brownsville, the growing Chinatown of Sunset Park, and Caribbean Canarsie, Hymowitz also wrestles with the question of whether the borough's new wealth can lift up long disadvantaged minorities, and the current generation of immigrants, many of whom will need more skills than their predecessors to thrive in a postindustrial economy. The New Brooklyn's portraits of dramatic urban transformation, and its sometimes controversial effects, offers prescriptions relevant to "phoenix" cities coming back to life across the United States and beyond its borders.

Genres: Nonfiction, Politics, New York

208 pages, Hardcover

First published January 22, 2017

Reviews

[Harlan · Rating 3 out of 5]

Hymowitz, a researcher at the Manhattan Institute, writes a generally well-researched history of Brooklyn, focusing on a selection of neighborhoods that either gentrified or didn't in the last 30 years or so. I quite liked a lot of the history -- it's clearly written and evocative (at least to someone who lives in Brooklyn and has a sense of what most of these neighborhoods look like). And it covers a variety of the causes of change, including government policy, structural racism (e.g., by real estate brokers), and immigration patterns. I found particularly insightful the ways that investment in old industrial districts can lead to change, but without the broad employment benefits of their original use cases. And some of the notes about migration were interesting -- I didn't know that poorer people move more often overall, and that the general problem with gentrification is less poorer people being forced out (although that does happen), and more that when they do move for independent reasons, they can no longer afford to stay in the neighborhood.

However, she repeatedly falls back into cultural stereotypes when explaining certain changes in ways that are deeply problematic. Much of the intellectual background of this book seems to be rooted in outdated libertarian/conservative ideas from the 1960s, despite citations and acknowledgement of more current theories, including many mentions of Jane Jacobs. Brazenly using the term "ghetto" and talking about huge diverse populations of people having better or worse ethics very much rubs me the wrong way. I do think the book is worth reading, for people interested in urban history and change, but please do so with a skeptical view.

[Jim Willse · Rating 4 out of 5]

During years I worked i New York, I was dimly aware of the institute's work, largely for its advocacy of stats-based community policing, which Guiliani credits for helping drive the crime rate down. The institute's overriding premise is that free markets combined with hard work and personal responsibility make for happy times. Hymowitz applies that to the history of Brooklyn, arguing that "creative disruption" past and present -- from the building of the bridge to the arrival of the mediarati in Bushwick -- is what makes Brooklyn work. I enjoyed pieces of the book, especially the history and the abundance of stats but found it unsatisfying in other ways. There's no discussion of the role of Latin immigrants, and in her consideration of the persistence of crime and poverty in Brownsville, she makes the astounding assertion that the way to solve the problem is to gentrify the neighborhood and relocate the residents someplace else, never mind where.

[Michael Lewyn · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book is mostly a set of essays about Brooklyn neighborhoods- two about gentrifying areas (Park Slope and Williamsburg), one about down-at-the-heels Brownsville, and two about in-between Canarsie and Sunset Park. (In addition, a few chapters didn't fit into any category). Each essay resembled a well-written magazine article- which is to say, the essays didn't tell me much I didn't already know or suspect, but they were colorful and interesting.

Every so often, I read something that surprised me. For example, today I think of Park Slope's brownstones as architectural treasures; but 19th century critics viewed them with the same kind of scorn that some Americans may give to "McMansions." And while many New Yorkers blame the gentrification of Williamsburg on upzoning, Hymowitz points out that many of Williamsburg's residential blocks were actually downzoned in the 21st century. Throughout New York, more blocks have been downzoned than upzoned.

[Diane · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book is a history of Brooklyn, with emphasis on its gentrification in the late 20th / early 21st centuries. It is well-written, and has some genuinely interesting things to say about advanced manufacturing. Much of the gentrification story has been told in other books, and is merely repeated here. I thought it was interesting that a book by an author who works at a conservative think tank would be so positive towards educated urbanites. It shows how much American politics has changed in the last five years. It would also be interesting to read a follow-on which looked at Brooklyn since the pandemic.

[Fredrik deBoer · Rating 2 out of 5]

It's well researched and decently provocative but not very memorable. Hymowitz is naturally writing from a conservative perspective but that's no demerit, and there's some real attempts to grapple with the social injustice inherent to gentrification here. Ultimately the argument that Brownsville needs some gentrification is shallow; you can come to that conclusion with a far more careful hand than she does here. And you should, because the stakes are quite high. Unfortunately for all of her deft observations Hymowitz does not bring that care to her analysis and her book suffers for it.

[Yunis Esa · Rating 4 out of 5]

As long time resident of Brooklyn, and as person that grow up in Park Slope, I felt that this book was able to explain the regions that the author felt were changing in alarming rate that defines it in a language other than gentrification.

[Frieda · Rating 4 out of 5]

Another great NYC history book ticked off my list.

[Danilo DiPietro · Rating 4 out of 5]

Excellent brief history of Brooklyn followed by in depth chapters about a number of neighborhoods in the borough. If you're attracted - or already committed - to an urban life, you'll want to read this. Thanks, Great Book Guru, for recommending.

[Barb Golub · Rating 2 out of 5]

The history of each neighborhood was interesting and the writing is clear. However, there are moments when Hymowitz relies on problematic stereotypes that can easily perpetuate racist narratives; she is particularly hard on unwed single mothers of color who rely on public assistance to help their families survive.

[Kendall · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book was information-filled and fascinating. I definitely recommend it if you have any connections Brooklyn or even if you're just a history buff.

[A Ter · Rating 5 out of 5]

Apart from several meandering parts in the middle of the book, this was a well-balanced, nuanced, multiperspective look at gentrification. I really enjoyed it.

[Tevere · Rating 4 out of 5]

I suppose like many people, I just thought gentrification = bad news for low-income residents of a neighbourhood. Predictably, it's more complicated than that. There are upsides (e.g. reduced crime), there are downsides (e.g. the new jobs aren't necessarily suited to the less-educated), and there's really no such thing as 'authenticity' when it comes to the ever-changing urban stew. A useful quick read. The sections on Chinese and Caribbean immigrants seemed too brief, more of a cultural sketch--I would've welcomed more individual voices from these cultures. Seemed like no Fujian first-gen immigrants' perspectives were represented directly? That's a massive oversight.