Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [mythsoc] Re: Seattle stinks

Expand Messages
  • Ernest Tomlinson
    ... From: Lisa Deutsch Harrigan To: Sent: Saturday, March 01, 2003 10:24 AM Subject: Re: [mythsoc] Re: Seattle
    Message 1 of 11 , Mar 1, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      ----- Original Message -----
      From: "Lisa Deutsch Harrigan" <lisa@...>
      To: <mythsoc@yahoogroups.com>
      Sent: Saturday, March 01, 2003 10:24 AM
      Subject: Re: [mythsoc] Re: Seattle stinks


      > I lived in San Francisco a number of years before the earthquake and
      > avoided the waterfront as it was dank and ugly. Now I enjoy driving
      > along the Embarcadero, now a boulevard, which is sunny and shows off the
      > old wharfs, water, and views wonderfully. I wouldn't mind living in that
      > area of the city.

      The trouble is, you can't, unless you're filthy rich. And that is whom the
      destruction of the Alaskan Way Viaduct will benefit--the filthy rich. Not
      being filthy rich, the Viaduct is for me the only good alternative to
      ploughing through downtown traffic on my way from Ballard or Fremont to the
      South. Also, there's no better view of Seattle to be had than from the
      northbound deck of the Viaduct. Yes, the Viaduct is old and liable to
      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
      the Viaduct.

      No, the only people who really care about pulling down the Viaduct are
      wealthy developers slavering to get their hands on the last bit of
      waterfront land in Seattle. They talk a line about "revitalizing the
      waterfront"--as if people like me are going to be able to afford even to
      shop there! This boondoggle going to cost billions, disrupt downtown
      traffic for years, and result in just another downtown tourist trap to be
      got through on the way to something actually worth seeing or doing in
      Seattle.

      Ernest.
    • Stolzi@aol.com
      In a message dated 3/1/2003 12:44:44 PM Central Standard Time, ... Sounds like the Big Dig in Boston - how long has =that= been going on? But I m afraid
      Message 2 of 11 , Mar 1, 2003
      • 0 Attachment
        In a message dated 3/1/2003 12:44:44 PM Central Standard Time,
        thiophene@... writes:


        > This boondoggle going to cost billions, disrupt downtown
        > traffic for years,

        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 as
        boondoggles of, ahem, MYTHIC proportions :)

        Diamond Proudbrook



        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • David S Bratman
        ... 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 3 of 11 , Mar 1, 2003
        • 0 Attachment
          At 10:37 AM 3/1/2003 -0800, Ernest wrote:

          >Also, there's no better view of Seattle to be had than from the
          >northbound deck of the Viaduct.

          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. Duwamish Head, just to name one. Ever been out
          there? Unfortunately much of its view of Seattle is blocked by ... the
          Viaduct.


          > Yes, the Viaduct is old and liable to
          >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
          >the Viaduct.

          That depends entirely on how the tunnel is built. It's not the ground that
          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
        • Jane Bigelow
          ... 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 as
          Message 4 of 11 , Mar 1, 2003
          • 0 Attachment
            > This boondoggle going to cost billions, disrupt downtown
            > traffic for years,

            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 as
            boondoggles of, ahem, MYTHIC proportions :)

            Diamond Proudbrook

            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.

            Jane
          • Yvan <tinidril@yahoo.com>
            ... Portland?... have affordable housing?? hahahahaha... only if you also have Seattle-level income to pay for it! But we *do* have excellent public
            Message 5 of 11 , Mar 1, 2003
            • 0 Attachment
              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!

              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
              now.

              God bless! Tinidril
              http://www.xanga.com/tinidril
            • David S Bratman
              ... 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 to
              Message 6 of 11 , Mar 2, 2003
              • 0 Attachment
                At 03:46 PM 3/1/2003 -0700, Jane wrote:

                >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.

                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 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
              • Ernest Tomlinson
                ... From: To: Sent: Saturday, March 01, 2003 9:39 PM Subject: [mythsoc] Seattle stinks ... Well, the few people
                Message 7 of 11 , Mar 2, 2003
                • 0 Attachment
                  ----- Original Message -----
                  From: <tinidril@...>
                  To: <mythsoc@yahoogroups.com>
                  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.

                  Ernest.
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.