I don’t know; maybe I’m getting old, but when I cracked the spine of Broke-Ass Stuart’s Guide to Living Cheaply in New York City and read :
“New York will never be yours; you will always be hers. She’s got you p***y-whipped and you f**king know it.”
I realized Stuart and I weren’t likely to get along.
I’m all for writers carving their own literary niches, speaking in their own authentic voices, but a vocabulary largely dependent upon a rotating showcase of four letter words—especially in a 450 page book—is likely to carve a niche that’s very tiny indeed.
Broke-Ass Stuart’s Guide might have been salvageable despite all that because the interest in snagging a deal in New York will never wane, but the places the author includes in his cheap guide to New York City aren’t even all that novel.
The TKTS booth and fake bags on Canal Street? Both have been in Fodor’s and Frommer’s for years.
And what happened to New York’s other three boroughs? Stuart includes Manhattan and Brooklyn, but the The Bronx, Queens, and Staten Island don’t even merit a sidebar.
All guidebooks are limited in long-term value, especially in a place like New York City, where a business that opens today is likely to be shuttered six months from now. That’s the nature of the genre.
But Broke-Ass Stuart is likely to be of little value of all, except to the limited audience who enjoys reading profanity-laden prose.
About the Author
More By This Author
- Book Review: Waking Up in Eden (2 comments)
- Book Review: Rick Steves' Travel as a Political Act (2 comments)
- Book Review: Thailand, Men's Paradise? (9 comments)
Related Posts
28 Comments... join the discussion!
-
-
I took a look at his site. Has some decent stuff on there, but I think I would stay away just to avoid the language. Thanks for your review.
↵ -
Short, sweet and to the point. Thanks, Julie. ps: Besides, didn't Carrie Bradshaw establish years ago that NYC is a dude? That he is, in fact, every New York single gal's boyfriend?
↵ -
how's the city treating you Eva?
↵ -
He's treating me like a princess!! (Oops, I specifically promised my friends I wouldn't start talking like NYC was my boyfriend…
)
↵ -
ouch. harsh review.
↵ -
Ouch indeed! Thanks for the review, Julie. I will be sure to steer clear of this one.
↵ -
Too late. When's the wedding?
↵ -
He hasn't proposed yet… I hear these New York boys are real hard to pin down.
↵ -
I picked up this book recently because I'm planning trip to NYC and I love his guide to San Francisco. I found him to be witty and thorough. The title off the book includes the word "ass". did you not expect it to contain some profanity?What I liked mos was that he doesnt take himself too seriously, which I detest about other guiebooks.
↵ -
Please excuse my horrible spelling errors in the above comment. I was clearly typing too quickly!
↵ -
I've met Stuart a few times, through CouchSurfing.com, as we both happened to live in NYC at the same time and now in SF (and I actually am a travel writer by profession). He is a nice, genuine guy who really does just want to show others how to make the most of an amazing city on a limited budget. While personally I don't use that sort of language (in my professional writing, on my own blog, in person even), in a nutshell, that's just how he his, and I think that's the type of audience he was trying to cater to. I know he has quite the following in San Francisco, but then again, people seem to be a bit more crass out here than in other parts of the country (e.g. this kind of thing would definitely not fly in the South, where I'm originally from). I work for a major guidebook company, and there are pretty strict standards we must follow. I think Stuart was just enjoying using his freedom of speech that comes with being published by an indie house and going for a more conversational, personable tone than you'll find in Lonely Planet, Rough Guides, Fodor's, etc. I'm not taking either side here, but to echo what Roya said above: His title is a pretty good indicator of what's to follow, and considering he speaks that way in the opening line of the book, those who are likely to be offended are the same ones unlikely to purchase this guide after flipping through a few pages.
↵ -
I read the San Francisco Guide and just cracked the New York Guide. I think you are entitled to your opinion, however in response I have 2 things to say; 1.The title of the book is "Broke-Ass Stuarts Guide…." not "Sir Stuarts Guide To Increasing Personal Monetary Value By Spending Little Income In New York''. Lighten up. Seriously. After reading your review I was of the opinion that perhaps you are the type who can turn coal into a diamond rectally, but since I have'nt met you I'm not going to rush to judgement via the Internet. 2. If you are offended by cursing and vulgar language than New York is NOT the town for you and you never would have picked up the book anyway.
↵ -
Hi Julie- Broke-Ass Stuart here. I came across your article a few days ago and hadn't planned on responding, but since you were so proud of it that you sent it on to my publisher, I figured the least I could do is give you my response. And don’t worry, because of your aversion to strong language I’ll make sure not to include a single swear word in this post. So I read your review of my book. It’s totally fine if you don’t like my writing style. I write the way people actually talk, most travel writing doesn’t, and what I do is not for everyone I guess. But if curse words offend you that much, how can you sit through an entire Quentin Tarantino movie or handle taking the subway everyday? If you don’t curse in your everyday life, you must be a far more restrained person than I could ever hope to be and I commend you for that. But the thing that actually bothered me about your review is that you dogged me for including things like TKTS and the fake bags on Canal Street without expounding on the merits of my book. For example there are entire sections that tell you things like where to get free food at happy hour, places where you can get a shot and a beer for $5, what the best dive bars are, and where the best street food is. You’d be hard pressed to find that in Fodor’s or Frommer’s. To be honest, I would be remiss in my duty to my readers by not including all three locations of TKTS (did you know there were three of them?). Just because something is well known, doesn’t mean it isn’t useful. PLUS you hyperlinked the words “New York City” to a wikipedia article, as if people had never heard of it. Now which one of us is telling people about something they already know? And if you had actually read what I said about the fake designer bags on Canal St., you would’ve noticed that I rail against the consumerist culture that creates the demand for them and that people shouldn’t buy them because they are made by children in sweatshops. Maybe I wasn’t clear enough when I wrote, “I just want you to know that most of those bags are created by children in sweatshop conditions. But hey, little hands make little stitches, right?” As for only including Manhattan and Brooklyn, you’re wrong, I gave Queens a whole three paragraphs of it’s own and I apologized for it in the book. But what can I do? As you noted, the book is already 450 pages. I’ll make you a deal, since you’re so concerned about Staten Island and the Bronx I’ll let you do those chapters for me when I update the book. Truthfully, I don’t think you actually read much of my book because if you had you would have picked up on the extreme sarcasm and tongue in cheek humor. So this means one of two things: A. That you wrote a review about something that you actually didn’t read much of (which is called amongst other things: dishonest and unprofessional). Or B. That you did read the book but weren’t able to pick up on the fact that it’s about WAY more than just cheap stuff. It’s also a not so subtle way of championing ideas like DIY, anti-consumerism, and enjoying a life based on the things that you do, not the things that you own. Either way, maybe this means writing book reviews really just isn’t your thing. I hear they’re looking for someone to adhere those “Explicit Lyrics” stickers onto cover of CD’s. Sincerely yours, Broke-Ass Stuart
↵ -
My first experience with Stuart Schuffman was before I ever moved to San Francisco. My brother and I were wandering around the Mission District when he saw his 'zine–something he labored over and produced on his own, then distributing it himself to everyone. He got his first book deal for the guide here in SF, and it's sold in many places. His guide to NY is just as helpful… It's understandable that someone wouldn't like the book if they are looking for a review guide that is straight forward and dry–Stuart is definitely not that. I actually did a multimedia story on him awhile back, the greatest thing I learned about him is that he is having fun with life and his travels–he doesn't take life any more serious that need be. And it reflects in his writing. If you're interested in seeing the piece I did about him, feel free to see my website (Its” target=”_blank”>http://www.mattmills.net).Its under the multimedia section.
↵ -
I think Julie Schwietert should pull that stick out of her ass and go on vacation with Samantha Brown.
↵ -
I haven't read his NY book but the SF guide is outstanding. Highly Recommended.
↵ -
Stuart- Thanks for taking the time to paste in your e-mail to me in the comments here. A few things for the record: 1. Whenever I review a book, I always notify the publisher when the review has been published. It's courteous and professional, whether the review is positive or otherwise. 2. It's not that I didn't expect your guide to be edgy, that I am averse to profanity, or that I am afraid of Quentin Tarantino movies (a hell of a stretch), but as I pretty clearly articulated in this review, I think it's pathetic that your guide relies upon profanity as its engine. You write that you write the way people talk– fortunately, I don't know a whole lot of people, even in New York, who talk like you.
↵ -
cont. 3. A review of a single book isn't a reflection on an author's entire body of work (I haven't read anything else you've written). Nor is a book review a reflection on you as a human being. I find it interesting that a few people have hopped to your defense here today–several days after this was published–to attest to your character. That's fine. But it's not the point of a book review, and it seems that the person who is really uptight here isn't me– it's you and the cadre of folks who appear to have been deployed to speak positively about you (Mr. Grieves– come on. At least I use my real name). 4. I did read your book. I don't think you offer anything that any other guidebook doesn't already offer.
↵ -
Well said, Stuart, especially w/r/t the inclusion of items like TKTS. There is a certain amount of familiar ground _any_ guidebook has to cover…or else Julie would've ended up saying something like "Broke-Ass Stuart's coverage is hit-or-miss–he digs up obscure bars with free-pizza deals, but fails to mention great, easily accessible deals like TKTS." Also, Julie, you missed the Queens section. It's small…but it's there. (I flipped right to it because that's where I live. In just a few paragraphs, Stuart nails most of the cool and relatively accessible things about the borough.) The fact that you didn't see it makes me question the substance of the rest of your review. As for the profanity, it seems odd to me that you'd choose to review a book that you'd already judged by its cover. Were you trying to keep your "most prolific contributor" title?
↵ -
I have to say I'm a little puzzled by the recent responses here. Whether or not Broke-Ass Stuart is "actually a really nice guy" isn't really the point, is it? A reviewer didn't like his book. That doesn't make him — or her — a bad person, so I'm not sure why this has suddenly become all about people's characters. One thing, though, Stuart: I had never heard of you before this little mini-debacle, so I can't say I know much about you or your writing. But I do find it a little odd that you're calling a reviewer "unprofessional" while simultaneously visiting a blog to insult her in the comments section. Haranguing reviewers who don't like your books is, at the very least, a little tacky, no?
↵ -
Reviewer's insufficiently explored introspection should be acknowledged: you are getting old. The reference to Fodor's and Frommer's says as much. The guide may not be for everyone, but hey, a round of applause for an informative guide that is simultaneously an enjoyable read.
↵ -
Authors who defend themselves in comments on blogs, make me laugh. I remember when Thomas Kohnstamm got into all kinds of little web flame wars over bad reviews of his book, and in the end, people just remember "Do Travel Writers go to Hell?" for writing the Colombia update from home and taking freebies (the first part wasn't even in the book either, just goes to show). So you can patronize Julie's review and defend your own writing, but it's probably doing the opposite of what you want. It isn't convincing people that she's wrong, it just makes you look like you can't take criticism. Maybe this is something you can use as an opportunity. Instead of being frustrated as a writer that people don't get it, you can try to understand Julie's perspective and decide what that means for your future books. Do you want to hit a wider audience? You might want to tone it down. Do you want to remain faithful to your core audience, then make the decision to stay the same. But accept the fact that you will not appeal to some people. But what ever you do, don't be like Thomas Kohnstamm, who in one breathe bragged about being a bad travel writer, and in the next took offense at people implying the same. You had to know that putting swears in your book was going to turn some people off. And if you're truly shocked by this, best not to let on.
↵ -
Hi Eva- I completely agree with you about the personal nature of the responses here and I'd like to explain. Because I mostly write in a first, person narrative form, people who are into my work often feel as if they know me well. I also throw Broke-Ass themed events like parties and pub crawls multiple times a year, at which I actually get to hang out with and meet a lot of my readers. The coupling of these two things can often makes it so that many people who have started out as fans, have become friends and vice-versa. That's probably why the responses seemed so personal. But as for my response to the review, I really don't think it was uncalled for. One of the things that the democratizing effect of the internet has created is a space where discourse happens. In fact that is entirely why Intense Debate, the engine that runs these comments, exists. Back when print media (newspapers, magazines, etc.) was king, a reviewer could write anything they wanted and not have to see any repercussions. Even if readers did write letters in protest to the publications, the publications got to choose which were published. But since those mediums are dying and digital media is taking over, people who choose to be critics must also deal with the possibility that their critiques might get openly critiqued themselves. Do you feel what I'm saying? One of the good things about this is that the people who do create (art, films, books, etc.) finally get a chance to openly defend and debate the merits of what it is that they have created. So just as other people have the right to judge my work based on the review of someone else, I have the right to stick up for myself. Ain't the 21st Century grand?
↵ -
Fair points, Stuart. You certainly have a loyal following! And I do, indeed, feel you on the interactivity of digital media, etc. (Matter o' fact, just the other day I was wishing a newspaper book review I was reading had a comments section, because the author of the review had made some gross factual errors about the book that I wanted to correct.) I think it's cool to point out what you view as mistakes and misinterpretations of your work, etc. I guess I just didn't feel like "I hear they’re looking for someone to adhere those “Explicit Lyrics” stickers onto cover of CD’s" was constructive criticism for the reviewer, or helpful to confused potential readers.
↵ -
Interesting that most of the folks coming to Stuart's defense (and again, of his personality, not of the book) fail to engage in any substantive conversation, much less a civil one. Instead, you want to react to your own sense of offense by saying things like "Julie Schwietert should take the stick out of her ass" and "You are getting old" and something utterly ridiculous about turning a coal into a diamond. I never said I dislike profanity or that I myself don't use it. What I said is that a 450 page that relies on a rotating vocabulary of four letter words is pretty pathetic, regardless of the audience, and by the way–the audience (ostensibly people who are moving to or living in New York, based on the title)–has plenty of existing resources for living and experiencing NYC on the cheap.
↵ -
<<…he doesnt take himself too seriously, which I detest about other guidebooks.>> and reviewers.
↵ -
Interactivity is great – what Matador is all about. I thought Julie's review was fair, but it's fine for Stuart and his pals to make their points as well. I wish sticks and asses never entered the conversation, but Stuarts own replies don't seem to cross any lines. NYC is not my favorite place in the world, so maybe it's easier for me to stay disengaged. And I should add that those who say mean things about Julie should know that she's one of the coolest, warmest, nicest, most considerate people in the whole wide world, someone who says what she thinks and is really living the life she imagines. Julie rocks.
↵
