When it comes to proper subway behavior, I have Very Strong Opinions about things. I’m not a big fan of the “Showtime!” troupes who sweep folks out of the way on crowded subways to perform acrobatic feats that are often more feet than anything else (though I did see a good pole routine on a semi-empty train a few weeks back). I also believe that healthy adults with backpacks should them respectfully at their feet, and riders should generally take up the right amount of space without doing anything too disgusting or personal in public.
So when I heard about a wedding on an N train on Friday, I raised a quizzical eyebrow. Maybe it’s because I’m amidst planning my own wedding (or at least my fiancée is), but I find myself unable to grow too skeptical of a wedding. And as far as minimizing impact to other riders, this one was perfect. The bridge and groom were married on a Manhattan-bound N train at 3:30 p.m. on Friday afternoon of Thanksgiving Day weekend. The bride boarded the train at 36th St., and they performed the ceremony while crossing the Manhattan Bridge. That’s a low-traffic time on a low-traffic route.
The groom summed up this zany idea. “We’ve been through a lot. Good times, bad times, and a lot of the good times have taken place on the train,” Hector Irakliotis said. “Confessions of love, reconciliations, goofy, ridiculous conversations — the whole spectrum. In New York, you spend so much time on the train, we thought why not?”
As Gawker noted, it’s exceedingly easy to answer Irakliotis’ rhetorical question, but the bride’s reason is enough to melt anyone’s heart. “I’m originally from Ukraine, and each time we’d come back here, I’d say to Hector, ‘It doesn’t feel like home until I see the skyline as we’re crossing the bridge.’ And he remembered that. He planned it out specifically so that we’d see the skyline as we were married,” Tatyana Sandler said. Hopefully, we won’t be flooded with copy cats, but as many of my Twitter followers noted, a beaming bridge is far more preferable to a flying foot landing on a straphanger’s nose.
I’m traveling for business this week and will check in when I can. I don’t anticipate any breaking news but, with the subways, you never know.
26 comments
You’re a hypocrite.
Sweeping everyone into the back of the car is either an offensive intrusion onto subway rider’s lives whether it’s for a wedding, showtime, or if I decided to start up a game of high-stakes dominoes right there on the floor of the train – OR, if it’s not an offensive intrusion because “oh, how cute, they’re getting MARRIED~~~” then it’s also not an offensive intrusion when it’s Showtime! or when I decide to buy a big ol’ chair from the Staples off Stillwell and then ride a 1 PM D train all the way up to Norwood while sitting in that chair just because I can.
Of course, we can all agree that Showtime! is wretched. And we can also agree that it’d be a real dick move for me to host a potluck on the A at any time. But somehow, because its a wedding, it’s OK? Because it’s the N and not the 4, we can just give it a pass? I think not.
If the view over the bridge was that important, you know what these two dinks could have done? I’ll tell you what they could have done: they could have paid for the permits and the service and the miscellaneous expenses associated with chartering a special Wedding N Train. Not only would it have likely been cleaner, but because that route is so low traffic, they could’ve easily fit an extra train into one of the gaps. I bet the MTA would have been happy to oblige that kind of transaction, too, because of their financial situation!
Permits should be wadded up and shoved into the state’s ass. That includes marriage licenses, especially ones that involve fewer than three partners. But weddings don’t risk kicks to the face and, if it was low key at a low traffic time, who cares? Not every slight deviation from what pasty suburbanites regard as normal needs to be regulated, policed, investigated, etc..
Everyone stop being so authoritarian plz, k thx.
Is there too much regulation? Probably. But in some cases, like disruptive public events, permitting is a vital and a valid process that ensures that these things are prepared for and accounted for by the relevant authorities. I agree that there’s no need for a marriage license, but there’s certainly a need to have a permitting process if you want to charter a special extra train over whatever stretch of track.
And I maintain that people spend money on dumber things for their weddings. Nobody’s going to bat an eye at these two spending $5000 or however much it might have cost to get an extra N slotted in over the Manhattan Bridge – and one that they weren’t going to need to “politely” shove people out of the way on.
And I wasn’t there, so all I have to go on is the photos and the article and my low water mark for how involved a wedding is. None of what I have – second-hand, mind you – suggests that this was low-key. Certainly, at the very least, anyone sitting in the car where the wedding was going to happen was asked to go to the back or get off, and there was certainly at least some confetti and preaching. (Hey, by the way, even money says these dips left all that confetti for the MTA to clean up. Any takers?)
Would I have a problem if it was two yuppies and one justice of the peace quietly going about their business in the middle of the train? I might be annoyed, but I could deal. That is my definition of “low-key,” and from all accounts, this wasn’t that.
But, hey, Bolwerk, I’m glad to know you want me to stop being so authoritarian. My grandma’s book club has been looking for a new place to meet on Thursdays, and I’ll let her know that you’re absolutely on board to have them meet on the 7 heading outbound. They can get kind of rowdy when there’s a disagreement, but they’re mostly harmless!
Here’s 1138 reasons to want a marriage license.
http://www.hrc.org/resources/e.....ed-couples
The most important one is that we all get sick and die someday. You want the recognition that you are legally the next of kin, first in line.
You are reading far too much into what happened and projecting issues that weren’t there.
No one shoved anyone. No one was asked to get off.
There was a polite request
“He invited everyone to stay, but asked if they would move to the back of the car, which they willingly did.”
The only person who is complaining is you. And you weren’t even there!
Book clubs are verboten too? What other digressions from sitting with hands folded bother you? Conversations? Reading? Surely kissing!
Once weddings and book clubs on the subway become problems, by all means find reasonable ways to regulate them. I don’t agree with how heavy-handed the reaction to showtime is, but at least that does involve a modicum of risk of physical injury to bystanders, so there is a real problem there.
If people ask, what’s the problem? Nobody has to comply with a request.
Do you really think there was a huge crowd that was inconvenienced by this wedding on a holiday Friday afternoon?
Black Friday? Yeah, I can see there being heavier than average loads during the mid-day. The peak will shift accordingly as commuters stay home but shoppers and travelers turn out in larger droves.
This case has already occurred so there is no need to make this into a hypothetical. It is now past; fact. One can easily see from the pictures that “loads” were not “heavy” and few if any were inconvenienced, except by perhaps the tragedy of witnessing others’ joy, or perhaps that joy interrupting the reverie of silent railfanning or something.
The evil of panhandling or showtime lies in its monotony, the drudgery, the day-after-day same screeching boomboxes and same sob stories always involving “I lost my job yesterday” even though I’ve seen you every day for the past 6 weeks. This is a one-time event that inconvenienced no one, and of all the things I’ve personally witnessed on trains during the express run along Central Park West, or while crossing the Manhattan Bridge, I’d ask for weddings 10 times out of 10, vs. the other options.
Man, is this harsh! Mr. Kabak allowed that his sense of propriety, of even-handedness, might be affected by his own looming nuptuals. And for that he deserves to be called out as a hypocrite? Wow.
Glad the NJ Transit police who allowed my wife and me to be photographed in front of Hoboken Terminal, without a permit (“You shooting a movie? A TV commercial? No? Just posing?”) had a little more heart.
Harsh. And borderline heartless. Just what New York needs more of. Not.
When I saw the headline in the NYDN, I thought it was an Improv Everywhere routine and that the headline writers might have forgotten to put quote marks around ‘wedding.’ Turns out I was wrong. And, as you said, an actual wedding on the train, what’s not to like about it.
BTW, I clicked the FC link and geez, I thought the Internet was broken when I saw the top of the page.
I myself am a big fan of Showtime, and not a big fan of the racist attitude to that troupe on this blog.
I can’t speak for any comments from others, but I’d love to hear how you think my reaction to Showtime is racist or how the attitude I’ve expressed has ever come close to touching on race.
I guess if you feel I’m being sympathetic to this wedding because it’s two white people, I can see why you may call my critique of Showtime racist. I’m not sure how else I can justify it other than to assure you that anyone who’s playing loud, disruptive music in subway cars at intentionally high-traffic times — whether it’s showtime, a mariachi band or a folk group — deserves the same level of scorn.
The wedding is a cutesy one-time thing at a low-traffic time, but I should probably not be as accepting. It’s equally annoying to anyone inside the car just trying to get somewhere.
The wedding is also not for profit.
So if it becomes a trend, we can all protest. Fine, I get that.
But really, so many so quick to take offense; it’s a great substitute for measured response (and it’s louder, too; can’t beat that). For a wedding, and from the reporting a meticulously planned one, at that. And people think my family is bloodless and without emotion.
As I said already: Harsh.
I have never once read that Ben has ever made a racist comment about ‘showtime’ or those that ‘perform’ it.
Here are the last three substantive posts about ‘showtime’ that came up in a search i.e. articles purely about it and not just mentioned in passing.
and Ben makes NO mention of the race of those involved.
July 2014
http://bkabak.wpengine.com/201...../#comments
March 2014
http://bkabak.wpengine.com/201...../#comments
January 2014
http://bkabak.wpengine.com/201...../#comments
Curious: has anyone investigated if NYPD is targeting black and Hispanic buskers at higher rates than white ones?
Speaking of breaking news:
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12.....f=nyregion
There is a tendency perhaps for people interested in transit to want guidelines and standards applicable in as many situations as possible. It makes sense.
But this isn’t one of those situations. If on no other ground, then I’d defend this as an exercise of the subway system’s unique overlap with the greater realm of public space.
Without public space, we’re nowhere. And it’s great to see people incorporate the subway as part of their community. They asked people, not demanded, and people happily complied. They got to participate in a community by doing so. Maybe if it were happening 20 times a day, and during rush hour, it would be disruptive enough to want to regulate. Rounding-error events should be part of the domain. Just my two cents.
During the better weather days at several scenic spots there are plenty of people who get their wedding photos taken in Central Park, and at other parks throughout the city.
Sometimes this may mean that a person (somewhere at some time) was asked to move so as to not block or disrupt the photograph being taken.
The folks getting married at making a commitment to each other, and in a sense are helping to build a community. The photography sessions often to not take much time, and most would consider the “intrusion” to be minimal at best.
Now if the wedding reception were taking place in within the subway car with served meals, the whole cake-eating ceremony, the various dances and speeches by the best man & family – that’s a whole different order.
I’d still love to see someone could or would arrange a wedding reception on a moving subway car. I’m sure a subway-fan somewhere briefly considered the idea.
Please note that until a few years ago there used to be a Golden’s Restaurant near the Staten Island Mall that had about half of an R-1 IND-type subway car installed in the restaurant for patrons to eat their meals. I suppose that some events were held there in the past.
Now if Ben were to hold his wedding reception inside a subway car, I’d hope he’d post the pictures online. I doubt that would happen, but hey you never know. (smile)
Mike
Does the Transit Museum offer weddings at the museum?
Loads of stationary cars there and no passengers to get in the way
They wanted it to happen at a certain point on the route (going over the bridge). I guess we should be glad they liked that spot on the route, and weren’t all romantic about riding through times square.
Times Square is a good divorce spot.
It was actually a genuine question!
Wasn’t having a go at the people having their wedding on the train at all (there are others doing that!)
“Does the Transit Museum offer weddings at the museum?”
I actually do not know if such an event could be held there. Maybe, Maybe Not?
I suppose one would have to talk with their Special Events staff to get a proper answer. I’m pretty sure that several issues would have to be discussed and worked out for such an event.
It simply might be easier to use a “transit iconic” place than the actual Transit Museum. Or to have “transit iconic” items on the tables and the decor. Just a thought.
Besides just how does one decorate a subway car with the “Just Married” decorations and cans? Would the chartered subway car take the couple to the airport (like the old “Train To The Plane)? (Smile)
Mike