... I can think of a few as good, including some that don t require one to be in a moving car to enjoy them. Some of these also are not themselves unsightly.Message 1 of 11 , Mar 1, 2003View SourceAt 10:37 AM 3/1/2003 -0800, Ernest wrote:
>Also, there's no better view of Seattle to be had than from theI can think of a few as good, including some that don't require one to be
>northbound deck of the Viaduct.
in a moving car to enjoy them. Some of these also are not themselves
unsightly. Duwamish Head, just to name one. Ever been out
there? Unfortunately much of its view of Seattle is blocked by ... the
> Yes, the Viaduct is old and liable toThat depends entirely on how the tunnel is built. It's not the ground that
>earthquake damage, but why not simply _repair_ it? That must be cheaper
>than the ludicrous notion of wrecking it and replacing it with a tunnel
>_under_ Alaskan Way, a notion that puts the lie to all of the developers'
>fits over the Viaduct's unsafety: it's all fill under Alaskan Way, and a
>tunnel through it isn't going to be any more earthquake-safe than the top of
makes construction earthquake-unsafe, it's how you build in that
ground. The Viaduct is not in disrepair in some way that could be fixed
for less money than building something new: it is unsafe in original
construction down to its foundations. This was already well-known when I
was living there, 20 years ago, and it's long past time to do something
about it. It couldn't be "repaired" without tearing it down to those
foundations and rebuilding it from scratch. Which is what they're going to
do, only the new version will be less unsightly.
I love it when ignorant amateurs complain that the professionals don't know
what they're doing.
- David Bratman
... Sounds like the Big Dig in Boston - how long has =that= been going on? But I m afraid we re straying offtopic, unless one could consider these asMessage 1 of 11 , Mar 1, 2003View Source
> This boondoggle going to cost billions, disrupt downtownSounds like the "Big Dig" in Boston - how long has =that= been going on?
> traffic for years,
But I'm afraid we're straying offtopic, unless one could consider these as
boondoggles of, ahem, MYTHIC proportions :)
Ernest and Mary,
Well, we could try to imagine Tolkien's reaction to these boondoggles.
Would the fact that in San Francisco and Seattle people are actually
removing superhighways please him? Or would he be too disgusted by the
whole nonsense to care? I don't know whether Tolkien ever expressed his
opinion of superhighways or not, but I'll bet he didn't care for them, and
I'll also bet that someone on this list knows whether or not he ever
commented in writing on the topic.
... Portland?... have affordable housing?? hahahahaha... only if you also have Seattle-level income to pay for it! But we *do* have excellent publicMessage 1 of 11 , Mar 1, 2003View SourceErnest wrote:
> I should have moved to Portland, which hasPortland?... have affordable housing?? hahahahaha... only if you also
> its numerous flaws too, but at least has
> affordable housing and a highway network
> consisting of more than Interstate 5 and
> the (soon to be demolished to make way for
> million-dollar waterfront condos) Alaskan
> Way Viaduct.
have Seattle-level income to pay for it!
But we *do* have excellent public transportation... Which you need
because the streets are really overburdened, narrow, old, etc... at
least near the center of town.... and pretty good libraries. Central
library has the most wonderful collection of old books! One summer I
followed a mythopoeic trail of authors (before I knew
what "mythopoeic" was) through those old tomes which included George
McDonald and Charles Williams and a bunch of others I don't recall
God bless! Tinidril
... Of course Tolkien had comments on this subject. For instance, in Letter 181, comparing England to the pre-Scouring Shire: I would not say that we had toMessage 1 of 11 , Mar 2, 2003View SourceAt 03:46 PM 3/1/2003 -0700, Jane wrote:
>Well, we could try to imagine Tolkien's reaction to these boondoggles.Of course Tolkien had comments on this subject. For instance, in Letter
>Would the fact that in San Francisco and Seattle people are actually
>removing superhighways please him? Or would he be too disgusted by the
>whole nonsense to care? I don't know whether Tolkien ever expressed his
>opinion of superhighways or not, but I'll bet he didn't care for them, and
>I'll also bet that someone on this list knows whether or not he ever
>commented in writing on the topic.
181, comparing England to the pre-Scouring Shire:
"I would not say that we had to suffer the malice of Sharkey and his
Ruffians here. Though the spirit of Isengard, if not of Mordor, is of
course always cropping up. The present design of destroying Oxford in
order to accommodate motor-cars is a case."
The "present design" to which he was referring to was a plan to run a new
highway through the beautiful Christ Church meadows south of central
Oxford. Tolkien was totally opposed; so were a lot of other people; and it
was never built. But it's worth noting that the only alternative presented
at the time was the status quo: constantly clogged traffic jams in central
Oxford itself. Only a few years earlier he complained in Letter 135 that
he had decided to move:
"This charming house has become uninhabitable -- unsleepable-in,
unworkable-in, rocked, racked with noise, and drenched with fumes. Such is
modern life. Mordor in our midst."
And that was the result of traffic going past his front door that the
meadows highway would have relieved. Ironic, isn't it? When I first
visited Oxford some 25 years ago the traffic situation was pretty much
unchanged from when Tolkien wrote in the '50s, and still very bad. Since
then it's improved somewhat, due to planning more intelligent than the
meadows highway design.
I don't recall anything about Tolkien cheering when various ugly modern
constructions were torn down, but not much of that was yet being done in
his day. He certainly had a lot of complaints about new construction going
up, though. Somewhere in Carpenter's biography is a reference to Tolkien
moaning "There goes the last of England's arable" whenever he saw new
buildings replacing a field. He owned a car during the 1930s, but after
World War II decided not to do so again, largely out of principle. (Though
he was perfectly willing to ride in other people's cars.)
- David Bratman
... From: To: Sent: Saturday, March 01, 2003 9:39 PM Subject: [mythsoc] Seattle stinks ... Well, the few peopleMessage 1 of 11 , Mar 2, 2003View Source
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Saturday, March 01, 2003 9:39 PM
Subject: [mythsoc] Seattle stinks
> Ernest wrote:
> > I should have moved to Portland, which has
> > its numerous flaws too, but at least has
> > affordable housing and a highway network
> > consisting of more than Interstate 5 and
> > the (soon to be demolished to make way for
> > million-dollar waterfront condos) Alaskan
> > Way Viaduct.
> Portland?... have affordable housing?? hahahahaha... only if you also
> have Seattle-level income to pay for it!
Well, the few people I know in Portland pay considerably less for housing
than I and most people I know here...although it's debatable whether, say,
the Sellwood neighborhood is really Portland. I think that it's probably
easier to get away with living some distance from the Portland city center
because there are more options for getting into town than (the Seattle
equivalent of) slogging your way down crowded I-5 or even more crowded
I-405. I drive to work at 5:30 to 6:30 in the morning, depending, and
already by the time the southbound commute from Snohomish County down I-5 is
stop-and-go. By 7 am it's a parking lot.
The biggest downside to Portland at least at the moment is that it's still
got the highest unemployment in the country, or near to it. But Seattle
isn't much better.