October 23, 2006
You Are Now Leaving South Austin?
Riding north on Lamar, under the Union Pacific bridge, there are some annoying blue panels that people often mistake for traffic signs. Well, believe it or not, that's art, and someone has decided to supplement deface that art by adding stickers informing people "you are now leaving South Austin."
This begs the question, Where is South Austin? Where does South Austin start and Central Austin end? Is South Austin even "South Austin" anymore? Some might consider Oak Hill or Circle C the real South Austin, while Taco X and that goat that eats cans the true South Austin.
As the city grows in every direction, that vague imaginary line that used to separate neighborhoods and cultures has become a little more hazy. What do you think?
|
Advertisement: Austinist Continues Below!
Post a comment (Comment Policy)
i live right by the goat (sometimes i can even smell him when going out to my car on hot days - it isn't pleasant, but i still love him) and i don't really consider my neighborhood south austin. i'd say i am central, nearly downtown. why? i can jog to the downtown area in less than 15 minutes and drive there in less than 5. how is that really all that "south"?
i think south austin starts at 290. that is how i define it anyway.
The signs are right. The real South Austin begins after you cross the river. Due to the sprawl it would seem we are more central now but the cultural epicenter of South Austin begins south of the river and ends at 290/Ben White. Being born and raised in Barton Hills, this is the opinion I have been groomed to adopt.
As a native austinite and someone who has lived in over 30 different places in this fine city, I say South Austin begins at the river, and ends and Southpark Meadows. everything inbetween is "South Austin". If you conjured up the ghost of Edwin Waller himself he'd tell you the same thing, although he'd put the southern limit a little further north. I think Dove Springs residents and those who live along LakeShore Dr. and Riverside consider themselves to be "south"; south central residents obsessed with 78704 always forget about them. (FYI i live in 78758 lol)
South of the river=South Austin
North of 51st=South Dallas
West of Mopac=Nuovo Riche Wasteland
East of 35=The workers Ghetto
Uhhhhh... "The Worker's Ghetto"? I think there might be a little more to Austin East of 35. I'm just sayin'.
Full disclosure: I live in what I consider to be South Austin, right near Curras.
So North Loop isn't austin, "-M"?
The river separates north and south austin.
Period.
South Austin is a little easier to define and I agree with Tarvin, the river is the boundary.
Mopac seperates West Austin and Campus/Central.
I disagree with -M, north of 51st isn't South Dallas, but I would call it the begining of North Austin...the Arboretum is more like South Dallas.
I heard that those blue things are actually a failed art installation. They are supposed to reflect cars' headlights onto the underside of the overpass, creating a pleasing visual effect.
So, since it's kind of a monument to hope and failure, we should honorarily relegate that one little strip of real estate to South Austin.
South Austin is a state of mind, not a geographical area.
Seriously though, South of the river is South Austin, but only directly south of the river and down to 290. People living in Onion Creek are not South Austin. While geographically it is, the reference to South Austin means more than what is currently the southern most housing development / strip mall (ahem, SPM). Calling something South Austin has to imply that the area meets the ideals of what it is to be from South Autin and what it means as part of the city's soul. The Cingular Store and Starbucks in SPM don't do that in any way shape or form.
First off a real South Austinite doesn't say 290, it's Ben White folks. Here are my boundaries: First, South of Barton Springs Road (notice not Town Lake because there will soon be a bunch of fake South Austinites living in the million dollar condos that are being built on top of the old Wendy's RIP.) Also there are wannabe South Austin establishments south of Town Lake i.e. Barton Springs Salon and P. Terry's, they are not included. Secondly, you must be east of Barton Creek (sorry to those of you that live behind the I-HOP, though east of Mopac, you don't count.) As far as a southern border I am tempted to go as far south as Stassney, the first major road south of Ben White. There you got Thrift Town and Cherry Creek Catfish "slam". And finally, I-35 is the obvious eastern border of South Austin, yet I would actually include parts just across the interstate that are south of Oltorf and north of Ben White.
I'm curious as to why you exclude P. Terry's and Barton Springs Saloon from South Austin, they are both owned by Austinites.
As for the condo issue - well, I'm not sure where to start with that. For some businesses like Flipnotics it's been good for them that people now think its cool to be weird and that weird is now trendy? Did that make sense? All I know is that all of those concrete lovers that used to rag on the 04 now want more than ever to live here. Now that is weird...as in strange, not weird like, well South Austin weird.
Both P. Terry's and Barton Springs Saloon are undoubtably South AustinĀ©.
"78722", i want to marry you
It seems like the idea of South Austin has just become what people want to invision as "Austin." (At least amongst the company I keep) That now simply consists of pockets of people an areas and not so much large geopgraphical boundaries. Or at least that's how I feel. There's not enough good Austinites left to sub-divide ourselves into quabbles. Even ones that are just for fun.
I like the blue panels on that stretch of Lamar. It's art that isn't obvious. "Hello. I am a statue on a pedestal, I fit the traditional definition of what people call art. My friend on the wall is bordered by a frame." -- screw that.
But some people aren't comfortable with unconventional art. Back in 1917 when Duchamp unveiled "Fountain" many critics were shocked. Its significance sailed right over the heads of pedestrian art taste. More recently, it was selected as the most influential modern art piece over works by Picasso and Warhol.
Seth
I think the problem most people have with the signs is that we paid $30K of tax payer money to someone to "design" them. I could see if it were a few hundred dollars, but $30 is a little much.
Hey, I live in "the Worker's Ghetto"! Alright!
South Austin may be a State of Mind, but anywhere in between E 290 and Riverside and east of IH35 is always considered "East Austin". At least that's what the news reporters say. . . and we all trust them.
seth--I can understand unconventional art, but blue reflector panels on the side of street? That's like putting blue traffic cones along a parking lot and calling it art.
Instead of the city using our money to pay some lame artist to put up blue panels and call it an art project, it seems smarter to offer the space to local artists to put their work up whether that be graffiti or a mural. I'm assuming this would require no city funds because an artist would be insansely pleased to be able to use this "canvas" that is smack-dab in the center of town to advertise their work.
But no, instead you have some worthless city council in the late 90's that had a brillant idea to pay from someone to do something that could easily be done cheaper and most definitely better.
Those blue things suck donkey balls. The biggest problem isn't that they're "unconventional", but that they look too much like road signage. I wonder how many fender benders have occurred because people were driving under the bridge staring at those things thinking "What the fuck do those road signs mean I'm supposed to do" while rear-ending the yuppy in front of them who is stuck in backed up traffic on their way to Whole Wallet.
People are never going to agree on the definition of "art". It'd be great if, instead of funding pricy permanent installations in places like this, the city commissioned rotating installations. This would increase the exposure of local artists to the community and hopefully eventually everyone would find something they liked or at least found provocative because, frankly, those blue things suck donkey balls.
South Austin started (and ended) with the Armadillo World Headquarters. End of story.
I would go with south of the river is the northern border of south Austin. The southern border is a bit more tricky. I can understand the Ben White/290 border. But there are a few neighborhoods south of Ben White that have a similar feel to the majority of the houses in 78704. If East Austin is the workers ghetto its has some very highly paid wokers. Houses in east Austin are getting crazy expensive. I looked at a 850 square foot house in east Austin for 270k last week. It was down the street from a house selling for 600k. I agree with the previous poster. It would be cool to allow different graffiti artists to paint the walls. Every 6 months or so a different artist could come in and do something different. Maybe somewhere at city hall we could have a picture history of each artist work on the walls.
stupid blue things. 30k - exactly one of the problems. the other being that they could have easily been vetoed in favor of some other artist, this place is chock full of 'em. no one i've ever spoken to about the blue "signs" can understand why they were approved. i avert my eyes and look at whatever new tagging's gone up under the bridge. thank you graffitti.