Re-car-lections may vary
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/3d9e1/3d9e150b58921da0612172e43a3ecf6012f1c602" alt=""
The association between Los Angeles, cars and traffic is well documented—not least in decades of Hollywood movies. Christopher Grimes had a pessimistic, or perhaps realistic, article in the Financial Times last week about the latest efforts to convince Angelenos to try public transport.
But here’s the thing: my mental conception of the city is completely different.
Wendy and I have visited Los Angeles exactly once, six years ago. This Amtrak train delivered us there.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/b6358/b6358cfe92aac71560214bc8943b004ef153bb51" alt=""
We explored the city on foot and by Metro. Perhaps as a consequence, when I think of Los Angeles, my memories are inextricably caught up with public transport. I think of the grand architecture of Union Station and the whimsical decoration of some of the Metro stops, like these film reels at Hollywood/Vine:
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/b6bd8/b6bd89e9be63da9728c84e7298e7eff71e8c8484" alt=""
Oh, and I remember my efforts to forget about work being undermined by these public health messages, which seemed to be everywhere:
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/71412/71412a23af768ca9a5599823a042d1f4ffffc3ab" alt=""
But what I absolutely don’t think of is cars, freeways and traffic—despite them being so clearly a major part of life for those who live in the city.
It’s a tidy reminder of how experiences of a city can vary, and how a brief visit can leave one with completely the wrong impression of what a place is really like to live in.
This post was filed under: Travel, Christopher Grimes, Financial Times, Los Angeles.