Weird and wonderful Washington DC

Washington, DC, the federal capital of the United States of America, is a slightly odd sort of place. While there were strong political reasons to create an artificial capital city out of nothing that straddled the northern and southern states, rather than use an existing city as capital, as a Londoner and a European I find it a bit peculiar. Here are all the very considerable trappings of state and of nationhood - a nation with a population in excess of 300 million, the world's only superpower... But where are all the people, the great and thronging metropolis you expect to go with that? Nowhere in sight. Step away from the government stuff, and you've got a modest, low-rise settlement of less than 600,000 people. Even around the 'sights', you can often feel like you're rattling around in them. The contrast between the full grandness of the American state and the almost smalltown provinciality of what's around it is a bit unreal, and it seems a shame for the American people that the remarkable things there are to see here are on the doorsteps of so few of them.

Yes, I did say "low rise" by the way. No skyscrapers in sight here - the Federal Government has never allowed buildings any higher than the Washington Monument. Apparently this is pretty well unique for an American city. But then the anomalies don't stop there - the District of Columbia is not a state but the possession of the Federal Government. Due to the wording of the US Constitution, this means that it gets no voting representatives in Congress, which can only be sent by states. Unsurprisingly enough this is controversial with DC's residents, and believe it or not the city authorities publish a protest on every car's official licence plate. This is "Washington DC - taxation without representation", a reference to the rallying cry of the American War of Independence of "no taxation without representation". But it's cut no ice so far.

The trappings of state are centred upon the National Mall, a fairly narrow three-mile strip which is largely grassed but contains various major landmarks. The most eminent of these is the Capitol, the home of Congress, the US legislature (i.e. parliament). It's the huge and imposing three-storey white dome, with a statue on top representing liberty, which makes this a well known sight and an externally imposing one - a bit of a 'wow' moment. To my surprise, you can normally wander up pretty much to the building's front steps, which I hadn't really expected in the post-9/11 world, even though to get in, the visitors' center is in an underground basement. From there you can take a fairly limited free tour, which centres on the famous Rotunda, underneath the building's dome. It's all about the artwork here, with the underside of the dome and a frieze along the top of the wall painstakingly painted with scenes from American history, plus huge framed paintings on the wall. It's way too crowded and noisy with sheer weight of other tourists taking the tour to be as satisfying to take in as it otherwise could be, but worth seeing nonetheless.

Next along the mall, you get to the Washington Monument. This is a huuuuge stone obelisk, apparently the tallest masonry structure in the world. It invites an obvious crude joke about which part of George Washington is being commemorated, and to me it's a rather bizarre way of commemorating an individual, but you can't fail to find it imposing and impressive, or to miss it from anywhere remotely nearby, which is quite possibly the point. Less than one-third of the way up the structure, the colour of the marble visibly changes - this is where the local quarry ran out of stone and they had to start shipping it in instead. This would drive me nuts if I had any ongoing connection to the monument, but maybe I'm just too perfectionist about these things.  

The Washington Monument in all its bizarre glory

You then reach the World War II memorial, of relatively recent and highly impressive design featuring a combination of multiple fountains, columns representing the dead of each US state, and two arches representing the two fronts of the war. European visitors might be somewhat surprised to see the dates of the war engraved as 1941-1945, but I don't want to be churlish since the monument is highly effective at evoking contemplation and respect. Past that you reach the rectangular Reflecting Pool, and then the classical temple built as the Abraham Lincoln memorial. It was on the steps of this memorial that Martin Luther King made his legendary "I have a dream" speech - the exact spot is commemorated with a (disappointingly worn away) engraving. 

 

The World War II memorial

Elsewhere in the vicinity are the national memorials to both the Korean War and the Vietnam War; the Vietnam memorial has the names engraved individually of all 44,000  American dead, while from the Korean memorial the clever and economical engraving "Freedom is not free" stayed with me. A pleasant walk round the bay takes you to the Franklyn D Roosevelt Memorial, by far the most effective memorial to an individual I've ever seen, and a fitting one to this greatest of modern US Presidents. Covering an extensive and peaceful waterside location, it features pretty fountains, 'scenes' from each term of his presidency, and a number of his great quotations carved in stone - rather than quote these, several of them are captured in my photo album.

I'd never really noticed on TV or in newspapers, but the White House is actually not that huge or that palatial to look at - certainly less so than the Capitol. It is imposing and authoritative enough though, and genuinely tasteful and attractive too. Getting a tour is impossible for a casual visitor, especially foreigners, but although the building is blocked off on three sides, you can wander up to the railings at the edge of the front lawn (with the fountain - the view you always see), hang around and snap photos to your heart's content - considerably closer to the building than I'd bargained on being able to get, which was a considerable thrill. If this isn't too random or too flippant, the detail that wil stay with me though is that the lawn was in considerably less than immaculate condition - the grass was neither especially short or neat, with unplanned splodges of daisies, and several bare patches. I found this frankly extraordinary - it looked more like my local public park maintained by Haringey Council than the one publicly accessible side of the official residence of the leader of the free world. Perhaps federal gardeners have been a victim of the credit crunch...?!

The White House

In lieu of a tour of the building, there is a White House Visitors Center in an entirely separate building a couple of blocks away - it's surprisingly small and makeshift-looking, but worth the visit even if you won't be blown away. It explains to you how the relative modesty of the construction of the White House is deliberate, because the early nation-builders of the US sought a contrast between the home of their elected president and the vast, overblown palaces of European monarchies. It has been steadily expanded, with the nerve centre of the West Wing (and the East Wing) being later additions. The President's family live on the second and third floors of the main building. I hadn't known that President Truman had to live across the road for three years while the structure was completely gutted and rebuilt, after an upstairs grand piano had fallen through the original wooden ceiling! The exhibition presses upon you though the very considerable opulence inside the building and the many events of state (domestic and international) that are held within - I hadn't entirely appreciated how much the First Lady is required to act as social secretary, leading the entertainments for VIP visitors. The one clear disadvantage in my eyes of the US not having a monarch or other figurehead Head of State is that a substantial proportion of the President's time has to be taken up  with ceremonial Head of State duties rather than the business of politics and running the nation - although unsurprisingly the White House Visitors Center portrays this work rather more positively, in fact glowingly.

Another highlight is the National Archives, where you can see the original manuscripts of the Declaration of Independence, US Constitution and the Bill of Rights. The first and the last of these are sadly largely illegible due to fading, but being able to see some of the world's most famous pieces of paper feels like quite an honour nonetheless. (The obvious value that Americans get from their constitution also made me feel irked at the lack of a British equivalent, but that's for another day...) There are extensive other exhibits at the Archives, a lot of them focusing on the Civil War; there's certainly no attempt across DC's institutions to bury this defining element of US history. There's also a welcome sense of humour in evidence at the Archives, with some of the more harmlessly entertaining letters sent to the Federal Government on display, like the former Civil War soldier who sent one dollar to the Treasury Secretary to salve his conscience for having taken a second loaf of bread in the barracks one mealtime - some 36 years earlier.

In stark contrast to NYC, riding the Metro in DC is quite a pleasant experience - it's clean, simple to navigate and trains are comfortable, but the main point of interest is the remarkable architecture of the 1970s stations. Every station appears to be exactly the same, but if that sounds like a bad thing, the underground station platforms are cavernous and fully elliptical, with concrete ceilings uniformly decorated with a pattern like a giant ice cube tray. The effect is enhanced by distinctly funky red circular lights embedded at regular intervals into the full length of platform edges. It's instantly captivating, and I'm pretty sure it's the most attractive piece of 1960s/1970s concrete design I've ever seen. That may not be saying all that much, but it is saying something. Additionally, the overground railway hub Union Station is quite extraordinary, every bit as grand as any of the federal landmarks, with a palatial interior featuring ornate gold leaf ceilings.

The Washington DC metro... proof that 1960s concrete can be cool!

With a couple more days in DC, maybe I could have discovered the 'real' city that apparently does exist here too. To be honest though, I haven't felt any great need to do so. I'm not sure this is a place where a visitor would easily feel substantially 'at home'. But if you think it will float your boat even mildly, spending a few days here just taking in the iconography and splendour - and the slightly unreal, weird air - is definitely well worth doing. 

Photos - http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=2388619&id=61207375&l=8fd32a0ed3 

An Englishman in New York

After the briefest of overnight stays in Calgary - which actually from a brief wander was considerably less dull and ugly than I'd expected, and I could probably have made a whole day of - it was an early-morning flight from there to New York City. 
 
My first glimpse of the city, and of Manhattan, was from the air, flying into La Guardia Airport. It's impossible not to be awed by the sight of Manhattan from the air - I thought it looked like some sort of monster Lego creation, with its tightly packed rectangular skyscrapers - and of Liberty Island which houses the Statue of Liberty. 


For the completely uninitiated, Manhattan is an island, and only one of NYC's five boroughs, but it's often almost synonymous with the city itself, containing all the major sights, and it's perfectly possible to have an extended stay in the city without setting foot in other boroughs. I did briefly visit Brooklyn, Queens and Staten Island (missing The Bronx), all of which have a completely different feel, with barely a skyscraper in sight.


I do think there's a bit of a problem with Manhattan as a sightseeing destination: for the most part you either have to get high into the air, or off the island, to be able to properly appreciate the skyline or the landmark buildings. Because there are just tightly packed skyscrapers on virtually every street in the whole lower part of the island, and because of the rectangular grid of roads, it's difficult or impossible to get a proper line of sight from a decent distance (or any further than across the street) of even the tallest buildings. Compare the fantastic views you can readily obtain in London of St Paul's Cathedral (thanks to planning regulations down the ages in that case), the Gherkin, Canary Wharf, Big Ben and so on - there isn't a lot of comparison. So amazing pieces of architecture as the Empire State Buidling, the Chrysler Building, the Municipal Building and so on undoubtedly are, it's difficult to appreciate them fully. My American ex-work colleague Sara, now settled in NYC who I was able to catch up with, tells me that estate agents have cottoned on to this issue, by plugging the best views of Manhattan as being from property in, er, Brooklyn and Queens, not from Manhattan itself. 

The Chrysler Building (up very very close!)

For this reason, the view from the 86th floor observation deck at the Empire State Building is all the more valuable and special. Although take physical stamina and a sense of humour with you, since it's very overcrowded (even though I went in the fairly late evening) and takes a long time to get in and out, and forget any thoughts of quiet contemplation at the top! The 360-degree panorama helps get you oriented, makes you realise how narrow Manhattan actually is, and thus quite how remarkable it is that 1.5 million people, as well as many thousands of businesses, call this home. There are other ways of seeing the city from on high, and it's worth doing both by night and by day to get two different experiences of the city. I was fortunate enough to get a daytime view from a 33rd floor rooftop near Columbus Circle courtesy of Couchsurfer Christian - again as with the original flypast, it almost seems fantastical, unreal, so utterly unique and incredible is the sheer quantity, density and scale of the monster skyscrapers. Another feature which allows you to see something of Manhattan is Brooklyn Bridge, which is also remarkable in its own right as an elegant and monumental piece of architecture, and which somehow looks to me more like a London landmark than a typical North American one.  

Brooklyn Bridge

You also see from the top of the Empire State Building just how dominant a physical feature Central Park is. Really, it is remarkable that such a huge swathe of park, right in the centre of Manhattan (the name couldn't be more apt), was ever created, and even more so that it survives. And it's wonderful. It's a genuine peaceful oasis, although lively in places, varied and well maintained. You could wander around exploring almost endlessly. It's seemingly the place in Manhattan to go jogging, with wide segregated paths, lots of shade, some gentle slopes and plenty of public water fountains; it's a habit I got into daily and thoroughly enjoyed. Although it's by no means the only park in Manhattan; other notable parks include Bryant Park (right on 42nd Street, the heart of everything), Madison Square Park and Union Square Park, all of which are also delightful. Without these the city could be overwhelming indeed so it all makes an enormous difference. 


If anywhere in the city is quintessentially New York, it's probably Times Square. The comparison with Piccadilly Circus in London is obvious - massive neon screens (with Coca-Cola inevitably featuring prominently in the advertising), the 'centre of everything' feel and accompanying buzz. Conveniently, there are public tables and chairs put out in pedestrianised lanes of the road, and it's a fantastic place to linger a while, just people-watching. It's something I could have done a lot more of numerous times. While sitting people-watching, I realised that the famous BBC journalist Andrew Marr was standing about 10 feet away from me with a camera crew, ludicrously over-dressed in the 33C heat in a dark suit but remarkably cheerful, doing vox pops with American passers-by about the Queen's visit to the city at that time. What opinions NYC residents were expected to have about the Queen, I'm not entirely sure, but it was a delightfully random sight. I passed through Times Square again after dark one evening, and it was remarkably bright still from the buildings and the traffic but most of all the neon - they say it always feels like daylight there and that's a very apt observation. 

 

Times Square

A compulsory stop I figure in Manhattan is Ground Zero. It goes without saying that there isn't actually much to see - it's just a massive building site. You would have thought that over eight and a half years might have been long enough to complete something new on the site, but apparently any rebirth was stalled for yonks by political wrangling. But anyway, the key word there was "massive" - the size of the hole, the scar in the middle of the most built-up metropolis on the planet, gives you just the merest hint of the enormity of what happened there. Perhaps a large bomb could have wreaked destruction over a wider area, but to have reduced to literally nothing such a huge plot of land, in what we all know was such a uniquely appalling, targeted and visually mesmerising way, without the use of explosives, still makes its uniquely awful statement. There's also a very considerable police presence on the site, unsurprisingly enough.


The Statue of Liberty is a bit of an odd landmark in my view, what with it being on an uninhabited island some distance from the Manhattan shoreline. While you can make it out clearly enough from Battery Park on said shoreline, it looks pretty small and distant from there. To actually get to Liberty Island you have to take a less-than-cheap tourist ferry. Tickets to climb inside the statue up to its 'crown' are extremely limited and were entirely booked up about two and a half months in advance when I checked online. Rather than pay just to be dumped onto the island, I decided to take the free option of riding the Staten Island Ferry. This gives a pretty decent view of the statue as well as of the Manhattan skyline, but I do place it in the "things you have to see but then quietly reflect are a bit overrated" category. I suppose if I was an immigrant to the USA from somewhere where liberty is in shorter supply, as many thousands (millions?) undoubtedly have been, I might have been more moved by its symbolism however.

While you don't have any of the trappings of national government in New York, with the capital city being Washington DC (and in fact New York City is not even the capital of New York State), what you do have there is the headquarters of the United Nations. This is not US territory, with the complex having its own UN post office, police and fire service. Tours are available; there's not absolutely as much to see as you might expect, but there's substantial narration and photo displays illustrating the nature of the UN's developmental and peacekeeping work, and the highlights are seeing the General Assembly chamber and the Security Council chamber (the latter being in a temporary location due to renovation, but an exact copy of the real thing). Fitting in with the very explicit UN objective of preventing World War III and possible further use of nuclear weapons, also on display is a statue from a Catholic church in Nagasaki close to the epicentre of the atomic strike there, which improbably survived (albeit with scorch marks on the back) when everything else around was totally destroyed. 

Inside the UN

I was in NYC for Independence Day, when a massive fireworks display takes place every year over the Hudson River. I went along, but I baulked at getting there four hours beforehand to secure the best view - therefore from where I was I couldn't actually see the river, but the display was still incredible. I've never been to a major setpiece fireworks display in London - the difference is that it was a beautfully warm summer's evening in NYC, whereas either Bonfire Night or (particularly) New Year's Eve in London are guaranteed to be freezing cold. So I can't draw comparisions, but surely by anyone's standards it was an incredible display. It went on a long time (possibly in truth just a little too long, with some drifting away before the end), on a scale large enough to cover the very large designated viewing area, and the technology involved in some of the elaborate arrangements and phasings must have been immense. The predominant colours of the display were, unsurprisingly, red, white and blue. It was a slightly odd thing for a Brit to be in the middle of, but I've been assured that Americans are waaaaay over any anti-British sentiment on their Independence Day!

Unsurprisingly NYC has a world-class arts scene; one of the major modern art galleries, the Guggenheim Museum, is famous as much for its remarkable art deco building as for the art inside. The International Center of Photography had an excellent exhibition on the history of the civil rights struggle in the US, showing through posters, newspapers and video as well as photos how in less enlightened times of segregation, black Americans were regularly either shockingly stereotyped or completely invisible in mainstream media - something which civil rights organisations latched onto the importance of tackling. This changed only slowly with 1950s depictions tending to be 'safe' and unchallenging, and the activities of the civil rights movement were often misrepresented by the media. The shocking catalogue of racist violence (some of it by the police in places such as Birmingham, Alabama) and murders however played a huge role in waking up the white population to the evils of prejudice. By the 1970s, media attitudes towards black people had substantially transformed, not entirely unconnected to the realisation that they were consumers with disposable income too. 

Perhaps the best gallery I went to however was the PS1 Contemporary Art Center, an offshoot in Queens of the Museum of Modern Art. With cheap entry, this is a huge, rambling ex-student hall of residence festooned with all sorts of distinctly contemporary art installations, many of them multimedia, by emerging artists. Much of it was excellent and it's a different experience to anywhere I'm aware of in London.

If you are coming to NYC in summer, make sure you book accommodation well in advance. Having tried quite hard but completely failed to find a Couchsurfing host (apparently a notoriously hard thing to do in NYC due to the popularity of the city combined with a small proportion of residents who actually enough space to contemplate putting anyone up), I left it late to try to book a cheap hostel bed and found very little left. I therefore had to book three nights in what turned out to be a seriously dodgy place, just a series of one-bedroom apartments converted into 'dorms' by sticking bunk beds in them, equipped only with uncomfortable and noisy air mattresses, with one farcically small Manhattan apartment kitchen and lounge designated as a 'common area' - in a rough, distant location too. With no signage anywhere, I'd bet money that it was unauthorised by either the building owner or city authorities (or both) - something that two locals told me separately is common for dodgy NYC places. It was a stressful, unsettling and time-consuming (because of the distance) start to my stay in NYC - and with the intensity and craziness of Manhattan being more than a little overwhelming for a first-timer anyway initially, that was a big deal. Fortunately the relatively well located Hostelling International (an organisation of which I'm rapidly becoming a big fan) I was able to get myself into after that felt like a home away from home.

The famous New York City Subway is a mixed bag indeed. It has some major selling points compared to other subway systems - it runs 24 hours a day, 7 days a week; a number of lines are four-tracked with both local and express services; and trains (although not stations) are well air conditioned. However, I found it hard to warm to for a number of reasons. It is incredibly confusing to use (and I consider myself pretty capable in such matters), with a horribly cluttered and complicated map, which isn't even readily available in pocket form, and information at stations is often appallingly sparse. Dot matrix display boards on platforms telling you which train is coming and in how long are rare (Sara tells me they're only starting to be introduced now - I remember London having them extensively when I was little in the 1980s). Train seating is uncomfortable bare plastic, and without arm rests dividing seats, locals commonly spread across two seats denying you a seat next to them. Stations are often difficult to navigate (e.g. there can be one entrance on one side of the street for one direction only, and a separate entrance on the opposite side of the street for the opposite direction only), and connections between lines seem a bit hit-and-miss (e.g. if you want to get from one side of Central Park to the other, don't even think about taking the Subway - get a bus instead). Oh, and it's dingy and dirty, with many stations in a shocking state of decay and disrepair. Allegedly it's better than it used to be, and there was evidence of the odd station being "rehabilitated" (seemingly the strange American term for "renovated"), but really it's often an unpleasant experience. But it usually does get you from A to B which I suppose is the main thing. 

People are much brusquer here than in California - New Yorkers appear to be famous in the rest of the US for their rudeness. However, I've sensed an upbeat, optimistic demeanour amongst many Americans on both coasts which is rather endearing - particularly amongst African Americans. The famous American way of parting "have a nice day" tends to have more sincerity and warmth about it than you might expect. I suppose if you're being cynical, you might link this to the fact that very substantial tipping (15%-20%) is essential everywhere, even in bars for each drink poured - this has developed as a result of service staff being atrociously paid below the legal minimum wage, which tips have to redress. Rather amusingly by the way, many North Americans are completely unable to distinguish between a British accent and an Australian one. At the NYC Couchsurfing social I went to I must have been asked at least three times whether I was Australian... 

American gay clubs have been an, er, different and interesting experience. The music is different obviously, and so is the way that boys dance, which tends to involve the pelvis and the knees more (which sort of goes with the much more rhythm- and beat-orientated American pop and R&B). In San Francisco a guy I got talking to had said he didn't need to ask where I was from because I "dance like a European"! Go-go boys pole-dancing topless are also common, as at Splash in NYC which many consider the best gay club in the city. Overall, I've not felt completely at home and have found myself looking forward (even more) to schlager clubbing in Stockholm. Pre-clubbing in NYC I did make a point of going to the Stonewall Inn, widely considered the birthplace of the gay liberation movement, as it was where gay people resisted police oppression for the first time during raids in 1967. Happily the venue is still going strong, with displays commemorating the venue's place in history, and it's quite decent for one or two drinks too. 

So what did I make of New York? Well, there's lots to love - there is an incredible buzz and energy almost anywhere you go, massive diversity in neighbourhoods and the population, great buildings, lovely parks, and generally more going on pretty well 24/7 than you can shake a particularly large stick at. For me, just being in such a huge city brings its own enjoyment, satisfaction, even thrill. But. I don't think I really felt my heart go pitter-patter, much as I wanted to love it. As I've discussed before, it's hard to put concrete reasons on emotional reactions (or lack thereof) to places. However I'll try. I would say that the primary issue is that I just didn't find the streets in the heart of Manhattan loveable - while the endless, almost unbroken tall skyscrapers, mostly laid out in a neat grid system, doubtless appeal greatly to many, they ultimately don't do it for me. My considerable dislike of the Subway was also a substantial downer I think. Add to this that I feel a limited connection overall with American people - somehow just talking to many of them seems harder work, with a greater psychological distance to bridge, than any of the other English-speaking countries I've been in. I have tried, and hope I managed to leave any preconceptions at the door.

I do strongly suspect that in principle I could find this a much better city to live in than to visit as an unconnected tourist - if I could base myself in one villagey area of Manhattan (disregarding the financial challenges of that) or maybe Brooklyn, learn how to get around optimally, find some local haunts and over time seek out like-minded people. I tried quite hard to find a Couchsurfing host and was disappointed not to manage to. But as with a number of other places I've visited, above all it was incredibly worthwhile just to see and experience a little of New York - and I'd have little hesitation in recommending a first visit to anyone else who thinks they want to see it for themselves.

Photo links:

Banff - http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=2385360&id=61207375&l=46d2b7f2e4

Calgary - http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=2388619&id=61207375&l=8fd32a0ed3

New York City - http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=2388651&id=61207375&l=03e937f798

Wowed and wistful in Western Canada

Vancouver is a city that has often been named by studies as having the world's best quality of life. And it is really not hard to see why. It's beautiful and I loved it. It's not a large city - population less than 600,000 - but it is multicultural, imposing enough and lively enough, while remaining compact, thoroughly in touch with its natural surroundings and, well, liveable.

I was staying with my friend Troy and was able to walk comfortably from his lovely flat to downtown. (For schlager/Eurovision friends who know Troy - he's a fantastic host with a great place, and he loves hosting, so go stay with him!) When you reach downtown, you find an assortment of impressive, modern, glass-and-steel skyscrapers - however what I loved about these is that there's substantial space between each one occupied by much lower-rise buildings. That means that you can actually appreciate each tall structure individually, and you never feel overwhelmed by them. Troy tells me that urban planning has been strong here. And I absolutely loved as an example of the human scale of the city that at one busy intersection in downtown, there is a substantial plot of, er, community allotments. You won't see that in Los Angeles...

You're never far away from the water that lines three sides of the city. On the eastern side you have the rather stunning Canada Place exhibition centre, built with white sails - but more importantly for the casual tourist, also a pier offering a truly amazing panoramic view of the mountains across the other side of the harbour. On the western side you have the lively beach area of English Bay. And to the north, you have the huge and rightly famous Stanley Park. It's huge and my exploration didn't extend beyond the 9km seawall path which encircles the park. This is incredibly beautiful and it's clearly not a park you'd get bored of quickly, or possibly even within a lifetime. Although there's a perfectly good bus network in the city, you can walk between all of these points fairly easily.

From the Canada place pier

 One of the mountains across the harbour is Grouse Mountain - it's a favourite pursuit for both tourists and locals to go and climb up it, which Troy took me to do. He does it fairly frequently instead of going to the gym, because the "Grouse Grind" climb is a substantial undertaking, climbing 853m over a total distance of 2.9km. But not only was it a good workout (alas I couldn't keep up with Troy and his local friend in the end, but I was satisfied with my time of 1 hour 5 minutes, as 1 hour 30 minutes is supposedly around average!), but the views from the top, of the water and the tree-lined peak beyond, are to die for. Grouse Mountain is also a ski area in the winter, and at the very top of the ultimate peak was a small amount of snow, despite it being late June. There was also a birds-of-prey display taking place at the top, so we got to see a hawk, peregrine falcon and a bald eagle. While birds are not entirely my thing, it was impossible not to be impressed by the size and majesty of the bald eagle. Oh, and thankfully there's a cable car down from the top of the mountain - in itself a memorable experience for the views it offers, as well as making you ask, "Wow, did we really climb that far?" I was seriously jealous of Vancouverites for having this on their doorstep - how on earth would a Londoner make a quick pop out of town to climb their local mountain?!

A view well worth the climb!! At the top of Grouse Mountain

There's a fairly substantial gay scene in the city, concentrated on a single street, Davie Street, where rainbow flags fly proudly. Combine that with a culinary scene that is apparently famous for its multicultural diversity, and you get an impression of a city which is a pretty major hub and cultural centre, not a backwater. Admittedly, it's not utopia, as there is a substantial homeless population and associated social problems, although for historical reasons this is heavily concentrated in one ghettoised area of the city where tourists are unlikely to wander. And, disturbingly, I also came across written and anecdotal evidence of a queer-bashing problem.

I ended up doing less sightseeing in Vancouver than envisaged. Instead I had an intense holiday romance for a few days with a gorgeous Canadian guy called Jon, on a short holiday himself from the neighbouring province of Alberta. We met at Celebrities Nightclub. Avid readers (?!) of this blog may recall that this hasn't been my first holiday romance (as in, guy I've spent significantly more time than just one night with), but this one was different and very, very rare and special. Rare and special enough that I extended my stay in Vancouver, seriously didn't want to leave, and still often now feel more than a touch sad that I had to say goodbye to Jon so soon. We've been keeping in contact since, and I would like very much to see him again sometime; with the vast distance involved I don't yet know whether this will prove viable on both sides. But even if there weren't potentially a boy involved, Vancouver would be a very attractive place to live, at least for a while. Watch this space.

A couple of social observations I've been making are:

• Canadians do not seem too fond of Americans. As a friend of Troy's put it ever so slightly bluntly to me: "Canada has all the good points of the US, but none of its bad points." Ouch!
• Regular cannabis use seems much more mainstream and 'normal' in both the US and Canada amongst people in my age range - even thoughtful, professional and health-conscious people. I've encountered genuine surprise from North Americans that I don't use it - you might call me the reserved type, but I'm pretty sure that regular use amongst British (...and European?) people in my demographic would be rare.

From Vancouver it was across a provincial and time-zone boundary on to Banff in the Rocky Mountains. I did this by an overnight Greyhound Canada bus - not the most physically comfortable experience of my life. It had also been made a touch more, er, interesting after both Jon and Troy had felt the need to tell me that a couple of years ago someone was beheaded by a fellow passenger during a Greyhound Canada journey...

The whole Banff area is a national park and a major tourist destination. Lonely Planet says: "If you were to sit down and try to design an area of the world that would be the most spectacular, the most awe inspiring and the most scenically overwhelming, odds are it might look a lot like Banff... National Park." And it's pretty hard to disagree with that. I've definitely not seen an area of countryside so beautiful in my lifetime.

Banff Town was built for tourism but is included in the National Park area, meaning that there remain strong restrictions on its development and growth; it therefore seems to be a manageable size. The town's setting could hardly be more stunning; looking in either direction down the main road, the man-made structures are dwarfed by a mountain directly behind. The town's buildings complete the picture postcard feel, although unfortunately the businesses within these buildings are often less impressive - tacky gift shops and chain eateries abound, something that a flick through the local newspaper showed the town council wants to do something to control. But the best thing to do is go to the tourist information office and get their excellent information on hiking trails which take you out of the town - there are lots of them, ranging from straightforward to hardcore. (You can also find canoeing, kayaking, whitewater rafting and horseback riding if they're your things.)

How's that for a backdrop on the High Street?

The Rocky Mountains are, well, rocky, with a greyish brown being the dominant colour of the rock in the panoramic views accessible everywhere. However, there is quite a spectrum of colours to observe, with significant deposits of snow remaining (in late June), some areas covered with trees, and some areas dark brown from a coating of water. While I was there the weather was typically sunny but with some fluffy cloud, which added delightfully to the colour contrast as some areas would be in sunlight and others in shadow. Below the mountains you can see beautiful carpets of green trees, and there is also the Bow River which is an unusual, and stunning, light turquoise colour. Although there are plenty of tourists in the area, you don't seem to need to get very far out of the town to leave almost all of them behind - so I genuinely found blissful solitude during my hiking. I only spent two nights in the area, but for a standalone holiday, if it's peace and quiet you're after amongst the incredible scenery, you could easily make it two weeks or more.

Both in Banff itself and, particularly, during the bus rides in and out, you are perhaps most struck by just how many mountains there actually are - a quick Google indicates that there are 1,356 mountains comprising the Rockies. From a single spot outside Banff called the Bow Valley View (where I was motivated to take notes!) at a height of around 1400m you can see Mt Rundle (height 2937m), Sulphur Mountain (2427m) and Sanson Peak (2231m), Tunnel Mountain (1690m), Mt Brett (2946m), Mt Norquay (2483m) and Mt Stoney Squaw (1852m). Nearby can also be observed a formation of limestone hoodoos (no, I didn't know what they are either - best to read the Wikipedia article than have me attempt to explain).

 The picture says it all, no caption needed really...

To summarise, as if I need to, this is an incredible part of the world, and one where I very much hope I'll be able to spend more time. I could have spent a lot longer, so just as well my next destination was somewhere as alluring as New York City...

Photos - losses and links

A bit of a disaster happened to me in transit between San Francisco and Vancouver. I lost my camera - complete with memory cards. The camera was ageing, extremely battered and not hugely expensive to start with, so the financial loss isn't so much of an issue. But, while I have been uploading my good photos to the Internet along the way, I hadn't uploaded photos for about two and a half weeks before the loss. So all my photos from New Zealand and California are lost.

I'd got to San Francisco Airport late, was almost denied boarding, and I was very short on sleep, so in a less-than-together state my first instinct was that I'd allowed the camera to fall out of my shoulder bag, most likely on the plane. However, calls to Air Canada and to the airport failed to turn anything up. On further reflection talking to my friend Troy in Vancouver, I reckon that even in a diminished state it wouldn't really be like me for this to have happened. So I concluded that it's most likely to have been lifted out of my shoulder bag somewhere while it was on my shoulder. I said to Troy that I wouldn't think of myself as inattentive enough to let this happen - but he pointed out to me that airport thieves do exactly this kind of thing all the time, targeting flustered looking people etc. They're good at their job and they just don't get caught in the act. 

I'm trying to be phlegmatic about the loss, because you have to expect things to go wrong while travelling, and it's only 2½ weeks of photos lost out of a 21-week trip. But you can take one thing for sure - I'm not going to leave my camera in the top of my shoulder bag ever again!!

Attention non-Facebookers only. On the subject of photos, I'm aware that there is a small number of readers on Blogger who won't have had access to any of my photos on Facebook. While in the early days of this blog my intention was to embed some of the best photos in the blog itself, I soon abandoned this idea on grounds of available time (although I might go back and do it at the end of the trip, but then I might not). So instead, a little belatedly, here are links to the Facebook photo albums thus far which you don't need to be a member of Facebook to be able to access:

Sweden - http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=2372797&id=61207375&l=1aad4f96b5 

Jordan - http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=2372808&id=61207375&l=991e82accb 

Israel - http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=2374049&id=61207375&l=93c49c5631

Delhi - http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=2374068&id=61207375&l=234edaade3 

Agra - http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=2374069&id=61207375&l=4a456eed21 

Rajasthan - http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=2372801&id=61207375&l=3b0b9fdea0 

Hong Kong - http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=2374135&id=61207375&l=22f4208583 

Bangkok - http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=2374252&id=61207375&l=1144d5e43a 

Northern Thailand - http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=2376380&id=61207375&l=4de0f5a5cf 

NW Malaysia - http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=2376482&id=61207375&l=da976271a0 

Cameron Highlands - http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=2377962&id=61207375&l=5179141f45 

Kuala Lumpur - http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=2377963&id=61207375&l=bec9eaec88 

Singapore - http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=2377965&id=61207375&l=d86c6e089c 

Tokyo - http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=2380680&id=61207375&l=74791e6a70 

Kyoto - http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=2380691&id=61207375&l=d2cfe0ee00 

Sydney - http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=2380698&id=61207375&l=6970438204 

Melbourne - http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=2380704&id=61207375&l=67bf6302ab 

I'll provide the rest of the links as I go through. 

San Francisco

What would you guess the population of San Francisco is? 5 million? 3 million? Well, it's actually just over 800,000. Yes, I was surprised too. This is a pretty small city that punches way above its weight in the world.

Although it's in the same state as Los Angeles, it really feels very different indeed. There is a friendly, personal, relaxed but lively vibe here, and it's the USA's most liberal city - George Moscone, the city mayor assassinated at the same time as Harvey Milk (see below), claimed that it was the fact that all different sorts of people have learnt to get along together in San Francisco that makes it the greatest city in the world. Well, I'm not totally sure about that (and I'm not sure how widely Mayor Moscone had travelled in Western Europe!), but San Fran is definitely a great city to hang out in for a while.

The core of the city is pretty much walkable (with a bit of stamina), and there is also reasonably good public transport. In addition to the MUNI system of rail-cum-tram lines and trolleybuses, there is also the BART (Bay Area Rapid Transit) metro system which is one of the more interesting transport experiences I've had - it's very obviously of late 1960s/early 1970s design and build, and with streamlined stainless steel trains and platform tiling of that era, must have looked very futuristic when it was first opened. Now it, er, doesn't, but with plushly upholstered and carpeted trains, it's remarkably comfortable, and strangely fun to walk into what the future used to look like!

To my surprise, I've found myself a big fan of the North American system of numbering streets rather than naming them. Essentially, provided you can remember which way the numbering goes (e.g. in the Civic Center and Mission areas, 'Streets' run in descending order from 1st to 32nd, north to south like rungs of a ladder), it makes it impossible to lose your bearings. With my woeful sense of direction I don't usually like to venture anywhere unfamiliar without carrying a good map - but by just remembering the order of the numbering, I very happily went out to the Castro on my first evening from my hostel from the Mission without carting my guidebook with me and with no prospect of getting lost.

One thing I hadn't appreciated before coming to San Francisco is that it has a peculiar climate which is not what you associate with California at all. I'd been distinctly puzzled by a brief conversation I'd had with San Franciscans in New Zealand when they said something along the lines of "Oh it's great you're going to San Francisco... but the weather's quite cold in summer". And alas they were right, sort of. Bounded in on three sides by the Pacific Ocean, the city has an extremely temperate climate and also plenty of fog on many mornings which is slow to clear. This means that real cold in winter is virtually unknown, but real warmth in summer is by no means commonplace, and September and October are actually the warmest months. On average it's the coldest major city in the whole USA (Wikipedia tells me) during June, July and August. I just about managed to sunbathe briefly one afternoon, but my jacket was a welcome companion throughout the day for most of my stay - and walking along the waterfront towards the Golden Gate Bridge, the cool winds were positively bracing...

...But don't let that put you off going to the Golden Gate Bridge, San Fran's icon. It is some way out of town with limited (but do-able once you've worked out how) public transport. However I'd suggest leaving it till the way back and walking there along the waterfront (but do take some layers of clothing!!), because by doing so you discover the bridge's wonder slowly - as from afar it doesn't look all that impressive, but it really is. Up close you feel completely dwarfed by the immensity of the engineering achievement and in awe of the superb aesthetics - finished off by the orangey-red colour which may seem like a strange one, but somehow works really well. As an added bonus you get to see Fort Point, the impressive American Civil War-era fort which the Golden Gate Bridge was redesigned to span over rather then demolish.

 

The Golden Gate Bridge [picture pulled off Internet]

The city's other famous stellar attraction is Alcatraz, the former prison island for the highest-security inmates in the US penal system, decommissioned in the 1960s. I hadn't realised it's only 1½ miles away from the mainland by ferry crossing; this apparently made the (impressive) view across unbearable for some prisoners, because they couldn't bear seeing how close but unattainable free life was. But the distance was generally sufficient, due to treacherous currents and mostly icy waters; some would-be escapees who made it as far as the water drowned, while others actually gave up and swam back! The island is now a national park because it features substantial habitation by rare wildlife; however the main attraction is the truly excellent guided tour of the former, perfectly preserved jailhouse. Ít's all done by an electronic audioguide which runs constantly, telling you exactly where to walk to see the next point of interest, with narration by former inmates and former wardens - I haven't come across quite such a system before (i.e with a constant commentary and walking directions) but it was superb, much better than tagging along in a large annoying group trying to listen to one human guide. The actual cells, which were tiny with no privacy, are still in tact - including the punishment block which meant soiltary confinement in complete darkness - and you get to see mock-ups of how cells used to look with and without prisoners' personal effects. You also get to see an escape tunnel dug by prisoners with a stolen improvised electric drill (only used during music hour) and a spoon - they escaped the island, but drowned while swimming across; and the exact key sites during the "Battle of Alcatraz" armed escape attempt, in which two guards and three inmates died.

 A cell at Alcatraz [picture pulled off Internet]

Unlike for the most part Los Angeles, San Fran seems to do public space well in the form of both parks and civic squares. Golden Gate Park (slightly away from the city centre but handily a MUNI line runs its entire three-mile (!) length) is the city's flagship park - it's huge and heavily covered in trees, to the extent that you could probably lose yourself in it for an entire day, forgetting you're in a city. It attracts lots of outdoorsy types for all sorts of activities, but it's also justifiably popular for picnics and general lounging around. In the city centre, between the Mission and the Castro, Dolores Park is also a very pleasant and popular spot for hip 20- and 30-somethings to lounge around or maybe have a kickaround - if you're fortunate enough to actually get June weather warm enough - and it seemed a great spot for people-watching. By way of squares, Union Square is a pleasant place to take a rest (or use as a meeting place), lined with department stores, even if it seemed a little soulless compared to some of the great European plazas. Probably more impressive is the Civic Center area which notably includes the United Nations Plaza, with monuments and engravings marking the formation of that organisation in San Francisco in San Francisco in 1945

The centrepiece of said Civic Center area however is City Hall. I wasn't particularly expecting to be blown away by the building's architecture, but I truly was - it's absolutely vast, with (I read later) the fifth largest dome structure in the world, and incredibly grand in a Beaux Arts style. It's equally impressive and imposing inside, with lavish marble walls featuring ornate classical carvings and a grand main staircase, and you're free to walk in and wander around. It's a genuine must-see on those grounds alone. However of course the original reason for my interest is that it was the site of the assassination of Harvey Milk, the world's first openly gay politician to win elected office (as a City Supervisor, the equivalent of a city councillor in British terminology) and gay rights hero, as well as Mayor George Moscone, by a mentally ill fellow Supervisor. There are statues commemorating both inside. (If you don't know the story of Harvey Milk, go and see at once the amazing and essential film "Milk" with a fantastic lead performance by Sean Penn.)

 San Francisco City Hall [picture pulled off Internet]

The Castro is of course San Fran's main gay district, doubtless made much better known (including to me) by thel film "Milk". It's a very concentrated one at that - the 'scene' there is concentrated into about three blocks, albeit that there are houses all around with predictably gay-heavy populations - and it has more of a sense of physical gay community than anywhere else I've wandered. There are public noticeboards full of gay-related posters, and the site of Harvey Milk's camera shop which became the unofficial gay community centre is currently empty but commemorated with a full windowfront display. The various shops in the area included the inevitable sex shops but also a huge and rather wonderful gay bookshop, and what appeared to be a shop for gay dog-owners. Honestly. Lately on my travels I've managed to blag myself a few free gym trials by lying through my teeth about my residence status ("Yes I'm a resident here... I'm a university student, studying International Relations") - in SF I got myself into a gym on Castro Street, which belongs to one of the major chain providers but is blatantly a gay gym. I've never seen so many tight-fitting designer gym outfits. :-) It's also the only private gym where I've seen a noticeboard with posters exhorting you to get a syphilis test... and with one open communal shower area, complete with signs telling you not to have sex in there. I won't miss that last bit.

This sense of gay community was certainly evident at the San Francisco International LGBT Film Festival, which was taking place while I was in town. I saw a compelling Norwegian film, a gay teenage coming-of-age story, called The Man Who Loved Yngve - this has won multiple awards elsewhere and I'd definitely highly recommend it. I also saw a documentary called Beyond Gay: The Politics of Pride which examined the partying and the issues in staging Pride festivals in both liberal and less liberal parts of the world. It showed footage from Rio de Janeiro where there are a staggering 2 million participants; but also from Warsaw where anti-gay protestors virtually outnumbered marchers; and from Moscow of an organiser getting his head kicked in by a baying mob, in this city where all permits for Pride marches are rejected by the Mayor and attempts violently suppressed by the police - they eventually managed to march about 20 metres [sic] with a rainbow flag in an anonymous part of town, which they considered a relative triumph. Plus we met the Jamaican gay activist who's seen 13 of his friends homophobically murdered. It was a sobering but deeply inspiring film.

San Francisco is also a city that defines itself heavily through its art scene, with several major museums  and plenty of small galleries, and I'd recommend MOMA, the one I had time to get to, as somewhere to spend a morning.

SF also seems to be one of those places where you can expect to see strange, random things. On Powell Street, there was an aged busker playing several verses of, er, "God Save the Queen", on a peculiar hand-made stringed instrument wired up to an electronic speaker. In the plaza outside City Hall on a weekday morning, I observed a large open-air step aerobics session. And one early evening, a rather inebriated but perfectly friendly elderly local guy struck up a conversation with me about the tolerance of San Francisco and life's ups and downs - I could forgive his untimely drunkenness as he was heading home from a wake for his best friend's son who'd been murdered. OK, so that last detail darkens the happy anecdote somewhat...

One slight surprise is that San Francisco does not seem to be much of a 24-hour city. My observations and those of fellow travellers from my hostel were that generally both bars and clubs (even on Castro Street) seem to be closed by 1.45am, if not earlier. Mind, if you want to be able to go out at all, for goodness' sake make sure you take photo ID (which for me has to be my passport as I have no driving licence) - one night I forgot, and got both myself and my two friends thrown out of the bar we'd gone to as soon as I tried to order. The fact that I'm really obviously well over 21 (the minimum drinking age), and that I only ordered a soft drink, both cut no ice. Well, they always have been much more uptight about drinking on this side of the Atlantic.

I really liked San Francisco for sure - I'm not certain that I really loved it though, even though this feels like a heretical thing to say. As I've discussed with other cities, it's often hard to pin clear reasons to your emotional reaction to a place, although I suspect that there was something about the Americanness of the city which just doesn't quite do it for me like the top European/Asian/Australian cities I've been to, even though it's fascinating to have seen it. I'll let you know though what I think of the US cities I'll be visiting on the eastern side - watch this space...

Lastly, some more general observations of California:

• Generally speaking the customer service is superb, in shops and even on buses. I suppose it makes sense that you get this in the home of capitalism...
• LA and San Fran are both seriously ethinically diverse places. Both .cities have non-Hispanic whites as a minority population, and in LA whites full stop are a minority This is probably something that negative stereotypes of the US regarding its lack of worldliness overlook - like many national stereotypes globally, probably based much more on perceptions of small-town than big-city life.
• The "soccer" World Cup is significantly more visible than you might expect. Some of this is clearly due to the loyalties of immigrants (or their descendants) from places better known for their interest in football - when Mexico defeated France, Mission Street outside my hostel came alive with multiple cars hooting continuously with their cheering occupants waving flags - but not all of it. At breakfast one morning three Americans were gripped by the USA v Slovenia match, even if one of them did think the opposing country was named "Slavia"...
• Something that I found mildly infuriating is that prices are almost always quoted exclusive of the sales tax that is normally payable. Apart from deceiving you into thinking things are cheaper than they are, most prices are round figures exclusive of sales tax - this means that the inclusive price is rarely a round figure. You therefore quickly accumulate large quantities of small change - which you can't even prepare to get rid of with your next purchase because you don't know exactly what you'll need to pay until you get to the checkout...
• Oh, and banknotes are all the same size and colour. This is less difficult to deal with than confusing coins - except for visually impaired people, who I believe I heard a little while back have won some sort of court order against the Federal Government that this infringes their rights. Good for them.
• It is a challenge to be a backpacker here and not put on weight - portions of food-to-go and snacks tend to be large to say the least. And California has the healthiest population in the US...