Your City's "Pittsburgh" Bar

[jmecklenborg]

Originally Posted by jmecklenborg

The military, farming, police/fire, offshore + the blue collar and service industry worlds are typically pretty invisible to urbanists and Twitter.

Seemingly right on cue, this article appeared earlier this week in the NY Times:
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/02/o...es-campus.html

I disagree with most of the article, since all a college student has to do to brush shoulders with the common folk is...get an off-campus job. Obviously, this circumstance is forced upon many, since they aren't from wealthy families, or at least they have the sense to earn some money while also taking out loans.

[Crawford]

The U.S. is really weird with the "campuses in the country" trend. Basically every other country has all the schools in the biggest cities.

You have huge state universities, like Texas A&M, and UConn, that aren't even in college towns, but basically built in the middle of nowhere. And the whole idea of the New England college in the forest is really odd. I guess cloister-like isolation made sense in the Jeffersonian ideal, especially with the historical bias against cities.

If the U.S. were like the rest of the planet, basically all the best and largest universities would be in the biggest metro areas, and none would have a campus per se, but would be integrated into the urban environment. So basically NYU environments.

[SIGSEGV]

Originally Posted by Crawford

The U.S. is really weird with the "campuses in the country" trend. Basically every other country has all the schools in the biggest cities.

You have huge state universities, like Texas A&M, and UConn, that aren't even in college towns, but basically built in the middle of nowhere. And the whole idea of the New England college in the forest is really odd. I guess cloister-like isolation made sense in the Jeffersonian ideal, especially with the historical bias against cities.

If the U.S. were like the rest of the planet, basically all the best and largest universities would be in the biggest metro areas, and none would have a campus per se, but would be integrated into the urban environment. So basically NYU environments.

Oxford? Cambridge? Uppsala? Leiden? Groningen? Nijmegen? Heidelberg? Erlangen? Plenty of foreign universities in smaller towns ... (And the ones in larger cities often do have campuses, even if less ostentatious than many American campuses...).

[Crawford]

Oxbridge were important cities prior to establishment of their namesake universities. Basically all the other top UK universities are in London.

Heidelberg was also a very important German city, historically. And all the other important German universities are in the biggest cities. The first German-language university was in Prague, BTW. And Heidelberg doesn't have a U.S.-style campus; it has buildings scattered in a city, like all the German universities.

In the U.S., you have very elite universities founded in nothing. Stanford is "The Farm". Cornell has a super-isolated location in the Finger Lakes hills. Dartmouth is in a tiny speck of a village. Williams and Amherst are essentially in the woods. The concept of Ann Arbors, Madisons and the like don't really exist elsewhere.

The best Canadian universities are in Toronto/Montreal/Vancouver, the best French universities in Paris, the best Japanese universities in Tokyo, etc.

[jmecklenborg]

Originally Posted by Crawford

The U.S. is really weird with the "campuses in the country" trend. Basically every other country has all the schools in the biggest cities.

Pittsburgh's two main universities (Pitt and Carnegie-Mellon) are right next to each other, and anchor one of the most interesting urban areas in the United States.

People make too big of a deal about living near other classes of people, let alone with them. People have this cozy idea that people will all hold hands and sing Kumbayah. The poor will be brought up by their brushes with the wealthy and the wealthy will gain appreciation for what they have been given. Um, maybe.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by Crawford

The U.S. is really weird with the "campuses in the country" trend. Basically every other country has all the schools in the biggest cities.

of the top 25 US national universities according to USNWR 2022:


13 are in the city-propers of significant cities that anchor 1M+ metro areas:
- columbia (NYC)
- Uchicago (chicago)
- UPenn (philly)
- duke (durham)
- johns hopkins (baltimore)
- brown (providence)
- vanderbilt (nashville)
- washU (st. louis)
- rice (houston)
- UCLA (LA)
- emory (atlanta)
- georgetown (DC)
- carnegie mellon (pittsburgh)


5 are in city-adjacent inner-ring burbs that are somewhat "city-like":
- harvard (boston)
- MIT (boston)
- cal tech (LA)
- northwestern (chicago)
- UC berkely (bay area)


4 are in further flung towns that are now part of major MSAs/CSAs:
- princeton (NYC)
- yale (NYC)
- stanford (bay area)
- Umichigan (detroit)


3 are in the relative middle of nowhere:
- dartmouth
- cornell
- notre dame

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

of the top 25 US national universities according to USNWR 2022:

True, but in most countries, almost all would be in that first tier (major metro areas, and usually cores). And some of these were founded in rural areas or small towns, they're just now considered major metros (say Duke).

And this is a list of major national research universities. If you look at the list of small colleges, the vast majority are in tiny towns. The U.S. has a shit-ton of high quality small colleges in rural America. New England, New York, Pennsylvania, and Ohio, especially, are thick with these colleges.

But even in, say, Michigan, there are notable small colleges (Albion, Hillsdale, Calvin, Alma, Adrian) basically on farmland. And the largest university, Michigan State, was built on a farm. The second largest and most prominent university, Michigan, was built on a (then) small town. The large, less prestigious postwar MI universities, built for the Baby Boomers (Ferris State, Grand Valley State, Saginaw Valley State, Oakland), were almost all built in nowheresville.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by SIGSEGV

Oxford? Cambridge? Uppsala? Leiden? Groningen? Nijmegen? Heidelberg? Erlangen? Plenty of foreign universities in smaller towns ... (And the ones in larger cities often do have campuses, even if less ostentatious than many American campuses...).

Yeah... U.S. universities seemed to directly copy how it was done in Great Britain. Especially in states that were part of the 13 colonies.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

Yeah... U.S. universities seemed to directly copy how it was done in Great Britain. Especially in states that were part of the 13 colonies.

Where in Great Britain were colleges built on farmland? The most prestigious British universities are Oxbridge, and in central London.

The U.S. followed the Jeffersonian ideal.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by Crawford

The second largest and most prominent university, Michigan, was built on a (then) small town.

The University of Michigan was established in Detroit. It moved to Ann Arbor 20 years after it was founded.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Where in Great Britain were colleges built on farmland? The most prestigious British universities are Oxbridge, and in central London.

Probably all of them? They're like 1,000 years old, so I know you're not suggesting they were established in the center of a megacity?

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by Crawford

True, but in most countries, almost all would be in that first tier (major metro areas, and usually cores).

that's fine, but the US is freaking huge compared to those little flyspeck euro-countries, and i think it's a good thing that the lion's share of the nation's elite major universities are spread out among many different major metro areas in different regions of the nation instead of all crammed into one or two urban centers.

the truly "middle of nowhere" major elite universities, like cornell and notre dame, tend to be the outliers.

Originally Posted by Crawford

If you look at the list of small colleges, the vast majority are in tiny towns. The U.S. has a shit-ton of high quality small colleges in rural America.

yes, when you step down to the the level of the small liberal arts college, the most prestigious of those lean very heavily towards small towns.

in fact the only elite small liberal arts college in the urban core of major US that i can think of is Barnard in NYC.

[pj3000]

Originally Posted by Crawford

In the U.S., you have very elite universities founded in nothing. Stanford is "The Farm". Cornell has a super-isolated location in the Finger Lakes hills. Dartmouth is in a tiny speck of a village. Williams and Amherst are essentially in the woods. The concept of Ann Arbors, Madisons and the like don't really exist elsewhere.

The best Canadian universities are in Toronto/Montreal/Vancouver, the best French universities in Paris, the best Japanese universities in Tokyo, etc.

Among other various contributing factors, do you think it also has to do with:

1. 1) the structure of our country, i.e., a weaker federal system in comparison to what was found in European nations at the time, with self-governing and highly-separate states with diffuse, non-urban-concentrated power;
2. 2) the agricultural focus of the American economy from colonial times to the Civil War era; and
3. 3) the fact that we just had a shitload of room?

Originally Posted by jmecklenborg

Pittsburgh's two main universities (Pitt and Carnegie-Mellon) are right next to each other, and anchor one of the most interesting urban areas in the United States.

I agree -- Oakland/Squirrel Hill is among the top urban "educational/cultural" neighborhoods in the US. It also bears mentioning that the area is also the home of Chatham University (founded as Pennsylvania Female College in 1869), a private university (now co-ed) and Carlow University (1929), a Catholic university. Alas, the main business district has been "chain-ified" and few real Pittsburgh bars still exist there.

[pj3000]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

yes, when you step down the the level of the small liberal arts college, the most prestigious of those lean very heavily towards small towns.

in fact the only elite small liberal arts college in the urban core of major US that i can think of is Barnard in NYC.

Barnard is really just Columbia though.


A decent number of the most prestigious liberal arts colleges are in locations that have been encompassed by larger city metro areas it seems.

Haverford, Bryn Mawr, Swarthmore (these are all solidly considered to be "Philly" area schools), Wellesley, Claremont Colleges, Wesleyan arguably... even Amherst to an extent.

And Davidson, Richmond in the south

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

Probably all of them? They're like 1,000 years old, so I know you're not suggesting they were established in the center of a megacity?

Both Oxford and Cambridge were major English cities when Oxbridge were established. Obviously London was a major city.

University of Michigan was founded in Detroit, but was only there a few years, and moved to Ann Arbor when Michigan was still a sparse territory.

Detroit didn't have any major university of note for nearly two centuries. Wayne State was a small teacher's college until recently. That would be very weird in the non-U.S. context, especially when the biggest university in the state was growing on farmland.

[jmecklenborg]

Originally Posted by pj3000

I agree -- Oakland/Squirrel Hill is among the top urban "educational/cultural" neighborhoods in the US.

It's definitely more impressive, in my opinion, than the area around OSU (the residential areas are fairly nice, and High St. near OSU is fine), but I have never found the OSU campus to be particularly interesting. The University of Cincinnati's environs should be more interesting than they are - the Gaslight District is very nice but beyond easy walking distance from the campus. The McMillan/Calhoun area has been overrun by plastic apartment buildings and chains. Short Vine's eclectic businesses have mostly left (although the Pittsburgh bar is still there, along with the artificial limb place).

It also bears mentioning that the area is also the home of Chatham University (founded as Pennsylvania Female College in 1869), a private university (now co-ed) and Carlow University (1929), a Catholic university. Alas, the main business district has been "chain-ified" and few real Pittsburgh bars still exist there.

I went to the Original Hot Dog place around 2000. That place was pretty intense.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by pj3000

Among other various contributing factors, do you think it also has to do with:

1. 1) the structure of our country, i.e., a weaker federal system in comparison to what was found in European nations at the time, with self-governing and highly-separate states with diffuse, non-urban-concentrated power;
2. 2) the agricultural focus of the American economy from colonial times to the Civil War era; and
3. 3) the fact that we just had a shitload of room?

I think those are all factors, but especially #2 and its relation to Jeffersonian ideals and anti-urbanism.

The U.S. is just uniquely suspicious of urbanism. It's anecdote, but when my European relatives/friends visit NYC, they only ask normal questions. When U.S. relatives/friends visit, they often have weird questions like "Will I get raped if I walk around after dusk/ride the subway/travel to Harlem or Brooklyn or Lower East Side". Especially true with boomers. And this is for NYC, the safest U.S. city, with a lower crime rate than the national average, for decades now. And this was even true prior to the Trump years and the Fox News bizzaroworld.

My European relatives, most of whom live in small, conservative lily-white towns, have never asked such odd questions. They travel by subway to the Bronx, no questions asked. Midwest Boomer friends of my parents are scared to walk around Midtown. Imagine the questions if I lived in Memphis or St. Louis. They'd probably rather visit an ISIS training camp.

[pj3000]

Originally Posted by jmecklenborg

It's definitely more impressive, in my opinion, than the area around OSU (the residential areas are fairly nice, and High St. near OSU is fine), but I have never found the OSU campus to be particularly interesting. The University of Cincinnati's environs should be more interesting than they are - the Gaslight District is very nice but beyond easy walking distance from the campus. The McMillan/Calhoun area has been overrun by plastic apartment buildings and chains. Short Vine's eclectic businesses have mostly left (although the Pittsburgh bar is still there, along with the artificial limb place).

Yeah, I like the Short North area around OSU, and the area in general, but yeah, I think it should be "better". I don't know Cincinnati well at all, unfortunately. Plan to make a road trip down the Ohio Valley sometime this fall though. Have always had interest in the city.

Originally Posted by jmecklenborg

I went to the Original Hot Dog place around 2000. That place was pretty intense.

Ha - The Dirty O! It was an institution as the location for all sorts of late nite, drunken exploits. It closed during the pandemic and was sold. Forbes Ave along Pitt campus was such a cool, urban college scene back in the 1990s. And now it's "cleaned up" and mostly chains.



This is the O now:

[pj3000]

Originally Posted by Crawford

I think those are all factors, but especially #2 and its relation to Jeffersonian ideals and anti-urbanism.

The U.S. is just uniquely suspicious of urbanism. It's anecdote, but when my European relatives/friends visit NYC, they only ask normal questions. When U.S. relatives/friends visit, they often have weird questions like "Will I get raped if I walk around after dusk/ride the subway/travel to Harlem or Brooklyn or Lower East Side". Especially true with boomers. And this is for NYC, the safest U.S. city, with a lower crime rate than the national average, for decades now. And this was even true prior to the Trump years and the Fox News bizzaroworld.

My European relatives, most of whom live in small, conservative lily-white towns, have never asked such odd questions. They travel by subway to the Bronx, no questions asked. Midwest Boomer friends of my parents are scared to walk around Midtown. Imagine the questions if I lived in Memphis or St. Louis. They'd probably rather visit an ISIS training camp.

Yeah, it does seem to be a uniquely American thing, huh? And only reinforced by TV/media in general.

I'm even still always amazed by the attitudes of people who live in the suburbs of a bigger city, and say things like, "Oh no, I would never go down there" (meaning basically any urban neighborhood of the metro area).

The big bad (and black) CITY!!!

[sopas ej]

I think many of you are thinking of universities in the modern sense.

Harvard started out as a Puritan seminary or divinity school, no? And many other universites (at least in California) changed locations a number of times. It was often the case that a wealthy person donated land for a new campus of an already established school. Caltech's current location is its second. UCLA's current campus is its third site.

USC to me is interesting because it's the oldest private university in California, and it's still at its original site. Public streets used to go through it, but beginning in the 1960s I think, streets were gradually closed off/bought by the university to create more of a campus-type environment. Also, USC entertained the idea of moving the campus in the 1960s because the neighborhood had "changed" by then, but they decided to stay. Pepperdine moved from South Los Angeles to Malibu in the 1970s for a similar reason.