Friday, August 24 —Well, there goes the ballgame. Old timers can hang out the “For Sale” sign. The New York Times has discovered Portsmouth. The article appeared in today’s “Havens” column in the “Escape” section. Those categories indicate to me, not that life is so great here, but that it sucks everywhere else.
Portsmouth, of course, has been discovered many times before since it first ventured into the tourism biz in the 1850s. But amazingly, New York Times writer Jeff Schlegel almost gets it right in a piece entitled “A ‘Mini-Boston’ on a Small Slice of Coast.” While New Yorkers still like to think of the world outside their border as the hinterland, Schlegel captures the “stew of arty cool, Colonial architecture and good restaurants” that make up the city’s attraction. (I always use the word “chowder” since I’m from here.) He gets the gist of the traffic snarls, real estate market and population correct.
The New York formula is to buy yourself a “getaway condo,” in the region. Then, if you’re ready to make the leap to living in the boondocks, search around for a house in Rye under a million dollars where you’re safe from the mountain lions and coyotes that freely roam the rest of the planet.
The surprise here is that the author actually gets the history right. There really are 18th century houses in Portsmouth. Life really did start in New Castle. The place really was a working class seaport. But that’s all over now. Portsmouth has been discovered by NYC. Pull up the wagons, Matha’, it’s time to move to Nova Scotia! — J. Dennis Robinson