Tom Wolfe: Chicago Is The New New York Or Maybe New York Is The New Chicago

Posted by John Carney, Dec 10, 2007, 4:25pm

It's hard to believe that it's been twenty years since "Bonfire of the Vanities" was published. Much of what was groundbreaking in Wolfe's novel has now entertained the common culture so that it is almost hard to appreciate how original his tale of the moral mayhem into which we were descending was when it was published. Remember, back then it was supposed to be Morning In America. Wolfe showed us that there was some truly dangerous under-currents brewing. We've since passed through that period, shuffling off some off its aspects--especially crime, which has been underperforming for years now--and adopting some it into the very heart of our culture--wealth worship and political correctness.

Today, the New York Times asks some of the people who characters in the book were based on about how New York has changed. The most interesting remark, however, comes from Wolfe himself.

He tells the Times:

The big excitement in the financial world, hedge funds, have already shifted their center of gravity out of the city, he said.

Greenwich, Conn., is the new Wall Street, and New York is the Chicago Commodities Exchange.

We're not really sure whether Tom's upgrading Chicago or downgrading New York. But if he is downgrading Chicago, he should probably spend some time learning about Chicago derivatives traders.

Looking Back on the Bonfire of the 1980s [New York Times]

0Recommend this! 30Comments
Posted in: Diversions

Comments

Posted by , Dec 10, 2007 4:36PM

Wait, New York has been downgraded to Chicago, not Chicago upgraded to New York, right?

Posted by John Carney, Dec 10, 2007 4:39PM

To tell the truth, I'm not sure what he means.

Posted by Anonymous2, Dec 10, 2007 4:40PM

Yeah, Carney's got it backwards

Posted by , Dec 10, 2007 4:46PM

I think he means the trading business in New York has lost its glamour. The real action is in Greenwichm and everyone left in New York are really not much removed from the hog belly traders in Chicago.

That oversimplifies things greatly, but it is true that the NYSE is now just a tourist destination. But then, the NYSE building has always been just one piece of a giant machine; the other pieces haven't all disappeared, as he acknowledges "They all want to be called Wall Street."

Posted by , Dec 10, 2007 4:52PM

it should be hard to believe that its been 25 years since the publishing. especially since its only been 20.

Posted by John Carney, Dec 10, 2007 4:55PM

Oh, shut up. I blame Bess for that error. And Santacon. And technical difficulties. Unusual market misbehavior.

Posted by girl, Dec 10, 2007 4:57PM

first of all, chicago is NOT new york. Any city where men find it acceptbale to wear ill fitting khakis and square toe shoes for a night out can never even be in the running.

Posted by slimjim, Dec 10, 2007 5:06PM

Chicago is the new New York while New York is the new Pittsburgh . Filled to the gills fat land monsters for women.

Posted by , Dec 10, 2007 5:14PM

Looks like Lil' Bolton knew what she was doing.

Posted by mrpink, Dec 10, 2007 5:21PM

Now don't go knocking Chicago. For a former CBOT pit resident/now "Wall Streeter" I do miss Chicago. Yes, you have tools who lack any sense of fashion, but let's compare here:

1) Chicago bars stay open to 5AM on Saturday, that extra hour of drinking really helps

2) NYC bars don't give you a "to go cup" when you need to take your 'coffee' back upstairs to the pit/desk

3) You can meet Larry Craig in the Bear Stearns bathroom at First National Plaza in the Loop, or he can make a housecall to 200 W. Madison

4) NYC Bars downtown don't give you that extra 'nip' in your coffee with whiskey every morning... When you're craving it

Now, I agree 4:57, we do have to address their problem of ill fitting khakis. The Gold Coast scene really has fallen out of shape since i've moved away from there in '05.

Posted by LLCoolJ, Dec 10, 2007 5:26PM

The one thing Chicago really has going for it is the awesome public transportation, the tremendous nightlife, and the mile and miles of Field of Dreams corn fields just outside the city.

Posted by slimjim, Dec 10, 2007 5:35PM

Plus Chicago has a nice lake while New York is filled with New Yorkers-code word for jews.

Posted by DRD, Dec 10, 2007 5:40PM

Although Chicago is filled with midwesterners-code word for mediocre, boring people

Posted by girl, Dec 10, 2007 5:50PM

I want to call this the give-up agreement but i think that name belongs to someone else...

Chicago has:
- beautiful lake/ beaches you can actually lie out on/play volleyball on
- fantastic restuarants
- clean streets (no vermin, seriously)
- cheap rent

new york has:
- A diverse, attractive and intelligent population on the whole
- a different city around every corner
- the possibility of every day being entirely different from the last.

The last reason is why new york stands alone

mr pink- you put up a solid argument though..if only starf*cks would spike my latte too :)

Posted by Connoisseur, Dec 10, 2007 7:39PM

Houston used to have the best titty-bars.

Posted by Variable, Dec 10, 2007 11:39PM

The capitalization of the CME (Chicago Mercantile Exchange) exceeds that of the NYSE. 'nuff said.

Posted by , Dec 11, 2007 9:33AM

girl @5:50 "the possibility of every day being entirely different from the last"

Excellent observation. That is so perceptive and true. You see it on the faces of the people on the subway. The majority appear sharp and ambitious, but in a variety of ways. This in turn brings a certain excitement to the place that is totally lacking in Chicago, which is basically pleasant, all-American, almost suburban.

Posted by inIT4the$, Dec 11, 2007 9:57AM

Houston still does.

Also, let's remember that Bonfire was not about a "stock trader" on the floor of the NYSE. It was about the true BSD's in the mid eighties...mortgage and junk bond salesmen and taders (think Ranieri and Milken).

Equities in Dallas,b*tches!

Posted by banned by BOA, Dec 11, 2007 9:57AM

yeah, especially on the face of that poor guy who got his head kicked in by a band of wilding NY "ladies" on the subway....chicago rules. ny sux - a city that peaked years ago. i guess all those un-stylishly dressed, out-of-shape losers clogging the streets of midtown must be tourists from the midwest, borough dwellers and the B&T crowd....go live in a real city. like london. or hong kong. or moscow....

Posted by billyray, Dec 11, 2007 10:21AM

NY has so many more opportunities to enjoy the ballet with so many more qualified participants, not to mention the Craig's list in-room massage appointments and short-term friendship relationships, it is extraordinarily difficult to compare it to the nearly Puritanical Daley-saftey-proofed Disneyesque version of a city that is Chicago. Althoug the lack of a city income tax counts for quite a bit, the lack of attitude is also a tremendous benefit, and the deep-dish pizza with good fried stuff that NY is no longer allowed to enjoy might just tip the scales (litterally) back to the 2nd city.

Posted by , Dec 11, 2007 10:21AM

Worth re reading is the riff in BOTV where Sherman talks about how he's able to save nothing and just squeaks by on $1 million per year. Its when he decides he absolutely needs to rent a limo to go to a dinner party, rather than taking a cab. Interesting to compare to the present, where tax rates are significantly lower but prices for apartments, beach houses and private schools much higher. And no one rents limos.

Posted by , Dec 11, 2007 10:24AM

@10:21 See @5:50 and @9:33

That's why NY is hands down better. There's a spark here completely lacking everywhere else. If you don't notice it, yr too dumb to notice it, which means you belong back with the hog butchers.

Posted by banned by BOA, Dec 11, 2007 10:45AM

"A spark here completely lacking anywhere else". Ooooo, how eloquent. You mean a spark here that's absent in the soulless Union county suburb where you grew up? Or the rural PA town where you went to college? Get off facebook and get out and see the world, Anon.

Posted by , Dec 11, 2007 11:12AM

No, I mean lacking in Boston where I went undergrad, Phila where I went to grad school. As well as Westchester, where I grew up (so yr partially right, if you buy the argument that Westchester is basically a similar but more affluent version of Union County).

I repeat: Chicago is a friendly and pleasant place but is basically not very interesting.

Posted by banned by BOA, Dec 11, 2007 11:32AM

So Anon, Westchester (where I currently live), Boston (where I grew up), and Philly (where my in-laws live). Nice. 3 data points, none of which appears to be Chicago (where I lived for 9 years). Believe me, Westchester's overrated and has nothing on the North Shore of Chicago, and Boston and Philly don't come close to the Windy City either. Both peaked years ago, unless of course you are a redsox or pats fan. But hey, that "certain spark" that NYC has over Philly and Boston MUST mean the same thing for Chicago, as all cities that aren't NYC are the same. It's that kind of analysis that was likely at the heart of the current credit crisis in which we find ourselves. Just wondering why Jamie Dimon maintains that house in the Gold Coast of Chicago when he gets all the "spark" he needs in Manhattan?

Posted by Yo! MG, Dec 11, 2007 11:43AM

Other way to look at Wolfe's quote is not really NYC/Chicago as locations, but "Greenwich" and NYSE/CME as concepts, namely Greenwich = buyside and New York = sellside.
For anyone in this business for a bunch of years, it is amazing to think of just how much the balance of power has shifted from the sellside to the buyside in the years since The Bonfire of the Vanities was published. Equity commission then were something like 15c/share; today it's a couple of pennies. The buyside then was dominated by stodgy mutual fund houses in Boston in New York where top portfolio managers routinely made less than the salesmen and analysts calling on them.
Sherman was a bond salesman - the personification of the pinnacle of late 80s Wall Street endeavors (think Drexel and Solly). Today the pinnacle of Wall Street endeavors is clearly the hedge fund guy. He's the guy with the fattest paycheck, the most ambitious Christmas lights (Paul Tudor Jones got lights!), the fattest car, the biggest house, the hottest wife, etc. Though he's equally likely to live in NYC as Greenwich, "Greenwich" is code for the hedge fund industry. In that sense, Wolfe is right that "Greenwich is the new New York."

Posted by , Dec 11, 2007 12:01PM

Lets not overthink this. People live where they do for a variety of reasons: job, commute, schools, family. We basically all seek to maximize at the lowest possible cost what's important to us. There is no one best place - sorry if that's what I implied. The individual that has a great job on Park Avenue that can't be duplicated on LaSalle Street and a family that prefers the burbs will totally disagree that your comment that the North Shore is better than Westchester.

I wont list the places I've lived in or visited worldwide but believe me its extensive (including lots of time spent in Chicago). My observation however about NY still stands: there is an energy there that is very different, especially when compared to other cities in America. Maybe cause its such a big and therefore diverse place. For some that's attractive, others bad. Its why certain kinds of businesses find that its worth paying in excess of $100 a sq foot to be there when others would rather be in Stamford at $45 or Cleveland at $23.

Posted by Chicago rules, Dec 11, 2007 3:31PM

NYC is a disgusting third tier toilet. Chicago is cleaner, has a higher quality of life, and its nightlife and women blow away anything NYC has to offer.

Posted by Jack, Dec 11, 2007 10:51PM

Chicago is a pleasant suburban town, NYC is a diverse global city. I've lived in them both and like lots about Chicago, but it doesn't compare to NY in terms of energy, ambition, and diversity. Also, Dimon is moving back to NY when his daughter is done with high school

Posted by , Dec 11, 2007 11:12PM

Re Dimon: Why didn't he move key parts of the merged bank to Chicago, which would have saved lots of money. Like M&A, Capital Markets, FX, Investment Management. He didn't because he understands that one of NY's strengths is the depth of its intellectual capital, which is something all of those businesses rely on. The streets are much cleaner in Chicago and the lakefront beautiful, but that does not make it the best place for originating M&A deals.

Post Your Comment