Boston is known for a lot of things: its history, being a global hub for higher education, and, of course, the Red Sox. People travel from all over the world to attend the best schools, work in the top hospitals and be part of one of the world’s most innovative cities. But something that slips everyone’s mind when considering the city of Boston? Its nightlife. Boston is known for not knowing how to have proper fun. 

Now, “having fun” might seem like a childish thing to lobby for, since going out is commonly associated with being a waste of time. However, with growing amounts of “burnout” among its population, Boston needs to offer a way for students and workers to regulate their stressful lives. Having fun should be seen as a necessity to good mental health for diligent and dedicated Bostonians. 

When Corean Reynolds, the director of nightlife economy in Boston, was interviewed on Radio Boston, she defended the dig at Boston’s nightlife, that it is “the city that always sleeps,” by referring to the nocturnal workforce of nurses, firefighters and construction workers. She is responsible for making both immediate and long-term solutions to support nightlife in Boston through grants and public policies. Her response was baffling, making it clear that even her own perspective on Boston’s nightlife was one of work and not fun. 

Despite what Renolds seems to think, good nightlife is never going to be associated with nighttime kayaking or working at the hospital. Good nightlife is always going to be about the clubs, the bars and the electric energy you feel at night when you walk through the streets. How is it possible to consider Boston as having vibrant nightlife when the first three clubs that come up when you Google “Clubs in Boston” have reviews on Yelp including: “Not clubby…” or “More dance hall than nightclub.” 

Boston is boring, and this is a fact that the government chooses not to change. Several policies dissuade the fun opportunities that usually come with urban lifestyle: Massachusetts liquor laws prevent happy hours, and others force businesses to cease alcoholic service before 2 a.m. There is a reason it is called “happy hour,” and banning it shows Boston’s attitude toward the contentment and health of its population. 

Dating back to the 1600s, these “blue law” policies are remnants of the Puritan culture that once prevented the sale of alcohol on Sundays. But the Boston of today is not a Puritan or traditional city — it’s one of progress and secularism. Why does Boston still hold on to policies from 400 years ago when they do not reflect the city’s present culture or future vision?

Now, it is understandable that government officials fear the primary horror that comes with alcohol: increased drunk driving rates. The danger of this is only exacerbated by Boston being dubbed the most collision-prone city in the US. However, this problem should not be solved by restricting nightlife in Boston. 

Increasing public transport access, lowering the prices of taxis and Uber and establishing a culture of citizens watching out for each other are all ways that drunk driving can be reduced — without affecting the sale of alcohol. In comparison to Boston, London, a city known for its nightlife, has good public transport, a culture that is against drunk driving, and happy hour in every bar, pub, and tavern. The U.K. consistently has fewer drunk driving accidents than every city in the United States, despite the U.S.’s higher drinking age and Massachusetts’ blue laws. 

Of course, drunk driving is not the only concern; studies have shown that increased alcohol consumption follows a trend of related harms, including injuries, crime and violence. However, these same studies have found that more tactful advertising of alcohol can make all the difference.

There is another motivation that all the discourse around liquor laws distracts from: the money the government makes. Sin taxes, an excise tax placed on goods that are harmful to society or individuals, for alcohol earned the Massachusetts government $98 million in 2023. That figure has only increased since 2019, when Massachusetts brought in just over $86 million in taxes on alcoholic beverages. By creating more lenient liquor laws, the government will lose revenue.

Besides the god-awful driving in the city, Boston’s highbrow reputation is being sabotaged by a puritanical attitude toward nightlife. By reimagining its approach — embracing later hours, happy hours, and improved night-time infrastructure — Boston will no longer be referred to as the “city that always sleeps.”

Sabrina Lopez is a sociology and international affairs combined major. Sabrina can be reached at lopez.sab@northeastern.edu.

If you would like to submit a letter to the editor in response to this piece, email [email protected] with your idea.