MySpace

World_Leader Tells You What To Think! ...and the truth shall set you free, as in beer

World_Leader



Last Updated: 7/25/2006

Send Message
Instant Message
Email to a Friend
Subscribe

Gender: Male
Status: In a Relationship
Age: 56
Sign: Aries

City: BRIGHTON
State: MASSACHUSETTS
Country: US
23 Sep 06 Saturday 

Category: News and Politics



My city councilman, Jerry McDermott, has  caused a bit of a national news stir by proposing that the  Citgo sign  in Boston's Kenmore Square be  taken down.


Here's a Fox News video with basics about the issue:

Fox News Citgo Sign Video spot


The basic issue is that this large, neon citgo sign has been a Boston landmark for over 30 years, and citgo is owned by Venezuela, and Venezuela's Hugo Chavez called Bush a "devil" or the "devil", so cover it up or take it down in protest.

I couldn't care less about the Chavez angle, to me it's just another "freedom fries" episode, a tempest in a teapot. Chavez obviously is vying to be known as a kook but he can't hold a candle to his buddy Iranian president Ahmadinejad.

But I think they should take the Citgo sign down nonetheless.

Why?

IT'S AN EMBARRASSMENT!

As the video says, London has its Big Ben, Paris has its Eiffel Tower, and Boston has its...Citgo sign?

Boston? The "Athens of America"? The "Hub of the Universe"? And its famous landmark is a neon Citgo sign?

As I understand it when Citgo wanted to retire the thing due to huge electricity costs in 1973 Boston made a deal to save it.

This is like sending yourself a valentine's day card.

Sure, Times Square and Picadilly circus and Tokyo's Ginza are famous for their amazing commercial neon signs.

But those are there because those companies really, really want them to be there.

But Boston begged and apparently has even paid Citgo to keep their one stupid neon sign. Citgo didn't want it there, and there aren't any other similar signs in the area (a few typical, changing billboards for cars or whatever, but nothing fancy.)

The Citgo sign is stupid. It's an embarrassment. It's pathetic. I've wondered why it's been there for years except that it represents the low stature of Boston and its inability to attract or build some sort of interesting landmark.

The sign is a hundred yards from the Boston Red Sox' Fenway park, and visible from the stands.

My suggestion: Turn it into a simple Boston Red Sox logo. And don't put any "World Series Champions 2004" on it either because if history is any indicator that won't change for 80 years. And if it does, if the Sox manage to win another series, what are they going to do put a footnote up?

Take down the Citgo sign -- It's an embarrassment.

I'm glad this has finally come up though I doubt Boston will do anything interesting about it or they would have years ago.


Offy
Michael Travers

 
I could see your complaint having some sort of merit if the Citgo sign were the most famous landmark in Boston, but that is far from the truth.  It's nowhere near the level of such famous landmarks as Big Ben and the Eiffel Tower.  We've lost enough of what used to make Kenmore Square cool to BU buying everything up.  We don't need to lose this landmark as well.  It looks pretty nice since they did it in LED instead of neon.
 
I bet if you were to take a poll of Bostonians a large majority would have a favorable view of the sign.  I guess we are all just low stature Bostonians.  With all of your digs on the city and the Red Sox I can put in a call for the Wahmbulance if you need it.
 
Boston landmarks: Zakim Bridge, Bunker Hill Monument, John Hancock (old and new), Prudential Building, U.S.S. Constitution, Longfellow Bridge, etc.  Those are just the ones that can be seen from a distance.  There are plenty of historical landmarks around the city as well.  To get bent out of shape out this one landmark of many seems pretty silly to me.  There's no way they are getting rid of it after it was just renovated.

 
Posted by Offy on 24 Sep 06 Sunday - 5:24 AM
[Reply to this