It's amazing what hitting the road for a couple of weeks will do for your soul, or at least for my soul. Hence, an overdue travelog blog.
After a slow 1st quarter, the CW and I have been graciously slammed with work. Two of these projects have required me to travel to the west coast to do a bunch of voice-over talent direction & recording. Because I had to be in 3 different places (San Jose, L.A., Las Vegas) I used that as an excuse to drive instead of fly. As much as I've driven around the country, going west from Austin was an excursion I had not had the opportunity to make.
There is something about driving cross-country in America that makes one reconnect with being American. The independence, the vast differences in landscape, the way the sky changes, the things you glean by talking to various people in bars, restaurants and hotels. Plus, there is the learning experience when you watch and listen to people who aren't native to the place you're visiting, whether they're tourists or transplants. It's even more fascinating to talk to transplants who are originally from the various areas of the country you call home, and understand what they want out of life and their new locale. It's a fabulous eye-opening education.
One of the things I had the opportunity to do was to drive up the Pacific Coast Highway from L.A. to San Jose. All I can say is...wow. I've had some fantastic drives in my years of road trips, but I think that one ranks at least #2 if not taking over the top spot in "breathtaking drives I'd take again." (The others on that list would be driving the Florida Keys, going through Yoho & Banff National Parks in the Canadian Rockies, and driving down the Outer Banks of North Carolina.) I could spend paragraphs describing it, but there is no camera or even an IMAX that could do it justice. It was an unbelievable experience.
I stopped at Monterrey to get some seafood. Unfortunately, I hit Fisherman's Wharf, which is not to be confused with the same place in San Francisco. The SF version is fabulous; Monterrey's....not so much. More of a tourist trap for overweight, underflavored midwesterners to go for the "California experience." My wine was crap (especially for NoCal), my eggplant appetizer was old and bitter. However, the oysters I had were to die for. And they were blue points! No one's doing blue points any more; how come? They were meaty, sweet, and had that taste of the sea that you can only get from oysters. Plus, I was sitting outside on the bay. How bad could life be?
San Jose has always held a lot of charm for me. It's the centerpiece of Silicon Valley, but it's also in a verdant valley between two mountain ranges with the ocean just over the western coastal range. It's big enough to have culture, yet small enough to be accessible and not overwhelming. Go Sharks.
Even with its flaws, California is probably the greatest state in the union, at least in terms of beauty. However, every state has its asshole, and California's is the biggest: L.A. How and why people continue to move and exist there is beyond me. The metro area is huge, overcrowded, and ugly. The people are pretentious to an absurd point. The traffic is probably the worst in the world. The real estate is so out-of-bounds that it makes the Bay Area and NYC look like bargains. Even the "beautiful people" have the help of silicone and surgeons.
However, the drive I took north out of L.A. through the mountains (California Hwy 2, mostly) was another breathtaking display of what Cali has to offer. I love being in Texas, I love the landscape of Austin, and at times I miss the verdancy of the midwest. But man...the varied vistas, the greenery, the floral displays, the ocean scenes, the canyons...it's an unbelievably gorgeous state.
Vegas is another world unto itself.
This was the CW's first visit to Sin City, and it figured to to be interesting to see it through her eyes; I expected that she was going to hate it. I can't say that she did, but I can say that it isn't going to be a destination for either of us. Neither of us are gamblers (unless you want to count my love of very-low-stakes home poker games). The food in Vegas, quite frankly, sucks. At least it used to be cheap, but now you don't even have that to recommend it (and it's expensive not only in the casinos but also far away from The Strip). And there's something sadly amusing about the blatant sex. Maybe it's because of my years on the road and having it shoved in my face, but something about the advertising of it basically says "if you don't get it anywhere else, at least you can get it here." And frankly, that is sad. Based on the tourists I see whenever I'm there, though, the message is hitting the target audience.
The drive back on the back roads of Arizona and New Mexico was extremely interesting. The deserts were in full bloom, so it was probably the most beautiful time of the year to traverse them. The most fascinating part is how often they change; every 20-30 miles the vegetation is different, the mountains are different, and the temperature is different. I found myself wondering, though, about the people who live in this area of the country. How did they get here, why do they stay, and what the hell do they do for a living? It's hard not to answer that with "they were born here, they know of nothing else, and look at their abodes; they're on welfare." I'm sure that's not the majority of the backroads desert denizens, but it's got to be a high percentage.
The trip also confirmed something else: Austin is indeed home. As much as I enjoyed (and probably needed) the excursion, it was exciting as we got closer to the ranch. This is where I belong.
Showing posts with label travel. Show all posts
Showing posts with label travel. Show all posts
Sunday, April 22, 2007
Sunday, March 11, 2007
A Little Perspective, Please
Just got back from a week in San Francisco, a city that is a lot like Austin except someone has secretly put caffeine in everything the populous consumes and tripled the rent on anyone that’s farther right than George McGovern to drive them out. Oh…and has the worst homeless problem in the country, if not the world.
SF is truly an international city, at least by American standards. One hears more languages and sees more ethnic diversity walking down the street than even in New York, where things often are a bit more segregated into ethnic neighborhoods. Yet for all of the international flavor, I’m not sure that very many residents ever leave the bay area. If they did, there might be a bit more diversity in thought about how to solve the proliferation of homeless people. Instead, it seems that the problem is made worse due to the lack of any dissenting voice.
(Austin, are you listening?)
First, most Bay Area citizens don’t seem to understand that this is NOT the way it is in all major cities; other places simply do not have the same numbers of homeless roaming the streets. But because SF citizens seem to think that this is just the way it is everywhere and because there doesn’t seem to be any diversity of political thought, their solution is “more of the same,” which is to throw more money at social services and give the underbelly a dollar or two when walking by. I find it sadly amusing that the same people who will accuse Bush of intractability can have this same “stay the course” mentality in the face of abject failure.
How bad is it? The homeless are sleeping in every 3rd or 4th doorway. They’re sleeping in the parks. They panhandle mercilessly. When they congregate in groups they intimidate passers-by. They stink because they see no reason to bathe, change clothes, brush their teeth, or wipe themselves. Despite all of the homeless shelters, government and private institutions that provide clothes, meals and job training and all of the dollars that are thrown at it, the majority refuse to work, help themselves or find any shame in being homeless. In short, no one seems to recognize the obvious: most of these people are not down on their luck, they are mentally ill and/or socially checked out. Like a family member with a drug habit, the solution is not to enable them. Yet, due to any voices to the contrary and, sadly, no conception of what things are like elsewhere, San Francisco is making their problem worse and worse. Societal dropouts actually MOVE to San Francisco so they can remain homeless. The weather rarely changes, so it’s liveable outside virtually year-round. And if things ever get too bad they can hit a shelter for a day or two to get themselves fed or get free medical care.
It’s unfortunate because SF has so many wonderful things about it; it’s easily the greatest culinary city in North America, if not the world; the green rolling hills, the bay, and the cliffs of the Pacific make it stunningly beautiful; it has managed to resist the homogenization that most of the U.S. has undertaken. And I'm not suggesting that all of these people get locked up or thrown into mental institutions (although that is the correct answer for some of them). But there has to be some accountability. Other cities have taken some novel approaches, such as making it a crime to panhandle without a license, having to check in with social services daily, etc. Once it's no longer easy and their presence isn't simply tolerated, it's amazing how many people move on. Again...99% of these folks are NOT people who are simply down on their luck.
I don’t see this changing any time soon, so like other travelers, I’ll continue to live with this as just one of the aspects of San Fran. But I can’t help but think how much they are hurting themselves economically by this systemic acceptance of the homeless as part of the landscape.
SF is truly an international city, at least by American standards. One hears more languages and sees more ethnic diversity walking down the street than even in New York, where things often are a bit more segregated into ethnic neighborhoods. Yet for all of the international flavor, I’m not sure that very many residents ever leave the bay area. If they did, there might be a bit more diversity in thought about how to solve the proliferation of homeless people. Instead, it seems that the problem is made worse due to the lack of any dissenting voice.
(Austin, are you listening?)
First, most Bay Area citizens don’t seem to understand that this is NOT the way it is in all major cities; other places simply do not have the same numbers of homeless roaming the streets. But because SF citizens seem to think that this is just the way it is everywhere and because there doesn’t seem to be any diversity of political thought, their solution is “more of the same,” which is to throw more money at social services and give the underbelly a dollar or two when walking by. I find it sadly amusing that the same people who will accuse Bush of intractability can have this same “stay the course” mentality in the face of abject failure.
How bad is it? The homeless are sleeping in every 3rd or 4th doorway. They’re sleeping in the parks. They panhandle mercilessly. When they congregate in groups they intimidate passers-by. They stink because they see no reason to bathe, change clothes, brush their teeth, or wipe themselves. Despite all of the homeless shelters, government and private institutions that provide clothes, meals and job training and all of the dollars that are thrown at it, the majority refuse to work, help themselves or find any shame in being homeless. In short, no one seems to recognize the obvious: most of these people are not down on their luck, they are mentally ill and/or socially checked out. Like a family member with a drug habit, the solution is not to enable them. Yet, due to any voices to the contrary and, sadly, no conception of what things are like elsewhere, San Francisco is making their problem worse and worse. Societal dropouts actually MOVE to San Francisco so they can remain homeless. The weather rarely changes, so it’s liveable outside virtually year-round. And if things ever get too bad they can hit a shelter for a day or two to get themselves fed or get free medical care.
It’s unfortunate because SF has so many wonderful things about it; it’s easily the greatest culinary city in North America, if not the world; the green rolling hills, the bay, and the cliffs of the Pacific make it stunningly beautiful; it has managed to resist the homogenization that most of the U.S. has undertaken. And I'm not suggesting that all of these people get locked up or thrown into mental institutions (although that is the correct answer for some of them). But there has to be some accountability. Other cities have taken some novel approaches, such as making it a crime to panhandle without a license, having to check in with social services daily, etc. Once it's no longer easy and their presence isn't simply tolerated, it's amazing how many people move on. Again...99% of these folks are NOT people who are simply down on their luck.
I don’t see this changing any time soon, so like other travelers, I’ll continue to live with this as just one of the aspects of San Fran. But I can’t help but think how much they are hurting themselves economically by this systemic acceptance of the homeless as part of the landscape.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
