Unlike other great cities, as eminent essayist and New York devotee Lopate (Getting Personal) observes, "Manhattan is almost pathologically averse to letting you wander to the river's edge and get close enough to touch the water." In this loose circumnavigation, first up the West Side from the Battery to Washington Heights and then up the East Side from South Street Seaport to Highbridge Park, he takes the reader up close on an information-packed journeydipping, as the particular location suggests, into memoir, history, current events, marine biology, city planning, literature, architecture, interviews, biography, films, ecology and more. Anyone who relishes the company of Whitman, Melville, both Cranes, even Sara Teasdale, among many other celebrants of the New York waterfront, will particularly enjoy the vicarious sojourn. The trek includes Chelsea Piers and the U.N., Gracie Mansion and the Brooklyn Bridge, Captain Kidd and the Gulf filling station on East 23rd Street. "Sewage and salsa," Lopate invokes in describing Riverbank State Park, and that mix of the problematic and the delightful pervades his account, "saturated with history," of the waterfront's metamorphosis from "a working port, to an abandoned, seedy no-man's-land, to a highly desirable zone of parks plus upscale retail/residential." This is a demanding bookformidable in some of its detail, complex in its broad approach. Tourists will find it enriching but only borderline useful. Its ideal reader, a New Yorker who cares as deeply as Lopate does about the waterfront as "the key to New York's destiny," will find it compelling as well as entertaining.
Copyright © Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
At the tail end of the Reagan years, I left Minneapolis, a city with one river, and came to a city with two: New York. The water was everywhere. I remember the East River and the Hudson pinching Manhattan as I swooped in to LaGuardia, their great blue swatches covering the subway map I got the first day, and the way the waves sloshed over the rail of the Staten Island Ferry and shimmered a thousand feet below the Empire State Building's observation deck that first week. But it soon became clear that all this water was pretty much a mirage: In the everyday paved life of the city, the rivers were nowhere. The East River turned out not to be a proper river at all but something called a "tidal strait," and the subway map's seas could have borne the legend "Here Be Dragons" for all I knew of them. Before long I inched away from the shore and learned to cling to Broadway like everybody else.
In this sense at least, New York hasn't changed a bit. Early on in Phillip Lopate's lollygagging book about the waterfront, he quotes a writer declaring, "You would think, to cross the city anywhere from river to river, that there was a general hydrophobia -- the entire population crowding to the high ridge of Broadway, and hardly a soul to be seen on either the East River or the Hudson." That was in 1843.
Waterfront is based on two Manhattan walks, one up the west side and one up the east; it seeks to put the rivers at the center of the story. Lopate, best known for championing the intensely subjective "personal essay" and for editing the recent Writing New York anthology, is a garrulous and good-natured guide. At his best, he evinces a passionate curiosity, an unapologetic lack of expertise and an eye for the ironies of history. He provides a useful capsule history of the late-19th-century development of New York's piers, "that heroic and ingenious, if now mostly forgotten, effort -- the greatest public-works project of its period -- to improve the New York waterfront." He draws out the hidden history of ubiquitous buildings that line the shore, like the Starrett-Lehigh Building at West 26th Street and the Con Edison Waterside power plant at East 38th. And his long digressions are often fascinating. Who knew that New York is spending $1 billion to combat the ongoing destruction of wooden piers and foundations by the lowly shipworm, the prosaic seawater pest that bores its way into wood "like a crawling prisoner who digs an underground tunnel with a spoon"? Or that the defeat of Westway (the proposal for a submerged highway on the west side of Manhattan) "haunts every choice made in its stead"?
Lopate mourns New York's loss of the "casual kasbah feeling [that] used to be the genius of cities" without slipping into misty-eyed reverie for every old thing. He supports the gentrification of the Lower East Side as benign compared to the concerted effort to remake the western edge of Manhattan as a place primarily designed to allow financiers to rollerblade near water. He challenges received ideas, criticizing the sacrosanct Frederick Law Olmsted and defending the reviled Robert Moses. And he can be a sharp and pithy critic: Battery Park City, he says, "seems to have everything you would need for a good Manhattan neighborhood, except a pulse."
But Lopate has no reporter's eye and, worse, no reporter's will. "The sense you most often get," he writes, "is that everything the city doesn't want to deal with, everything 'repressed,' has been pushed to the water's edge." He's right, but content to leave the details to others. At a natty westside motel he declares, "Surely the reader can imagine the kinds of rooms upstairs, without my having to inspect the décor." Later, he declines to ask any tough questions of a waterfront expert: "If I were an investigative reporter, I would certainly do so. But I'm too lazy. I'm a belletrist, for God's sake!" And in a Manhattanville diner he asks a Greek immigrant whether much has changed and leaves it at that: "I can't be bothered to question him further about the past while decoding his accent. . . . Besides, what is there to ask? He washed up on our American shores thirty-eight years ago, and this is as far as he got. Joseph Mitchell would have squeezed at least twenty pages' worth out of him."
Mitchell's ghost hangs over Lopate's book. Lopate lauds Mitchell's prose but criticizes him as too objective, too focused on facts and details, too willing to repress himself in favor of the story. "He wrote unfailingly well; I'll write badly, or at least unevenly." Whatever the quality of its prose, Waterfront is more than subjective; it is relentlessly confessional. We learn that Lopate can "recite the list" of New York City mayors "with [his] eyes closed"; that he's got "perennially sinusitic nostrils" and is "notoriously clumsy"; and that he "placed" the doctor his first wife saw for an abortion in his "harem of erotic fantasies instantly, jerk that I am." When he describes undistinguished buildings as "grunts enlisted in the great war against the horror of emptiness," one can't help thinking of Lopate as fighting the same war himself.
In the end, Lopate ignores the waterfront as much as any other New Yorker. Waterfront turns inward, not just to New York's high ground but to its inner heart; there is a serious argument about the city's character here. After the successive shocks of the fiscal crisis of the 1970s, the civic deterioration of the 1980s, the suburban-style retail and housing development of the 1990s and the terrorist attacks of 2001, Waterfront feels like a stolen glance over the parapet, a rearguard reconnaissance to gauge the city's sense of itself. Though Lopate says New York is "between mythologies," his conclusion is plain. Waterfront doesn't have the succinct charm of E.B. White's Here Is New York or the eerie resonance of Ben Katchor's Julius Knipl, Real Estate Photographer or the intrepid verve of Robert Sullivan's The Meadowlands, but it shares with all of them a heartfelt wonder at New York's abiding vitality.
Reviewed by Matt Weiland
Copyright 2004, The Washington Post Co. All Rights Reserved.