California Culture: Circa 2000

[methodwriter85]

People still do the debutante thing? How bizarre.

 

Not nearly as bizarre as the father/daughter dances where girls proclaim their intention to remain virgins until marriage. I saw that in the documentary "The Education of Shelby Knox", where a girl from Lubbock, Texas fights to add comprehensive sex education. They're called "purity balls", but they're more of a Bible belt thing.

 

All I know about debutante balls was that episode of the O.C. where Ryan was Marissa's escort to 47th Annual Newport Beach Cotillion and everyone found out that Marissa's dad was an embezzler.

 

Anyway, here's another installment of Tom Explores Los Angeles....this time, he follows a man's job is to paint over graffitti all throughout Los Angeles city proper:

 

 

Tagging was VERY popular with the people I grew up with, and there are/were a lot of taggers throughout the Wilmington/Newark area, so I've seen a lot of graffiti in my day. I don't mind graffiti when it's within certain parameters- that it's not being done on actual businesses or old historical buildings, and it's actually artistic and not just someone writing their name. And I sure as hell do not like it when people do it over murals- luckily you don't see that as much around the Newark, DE area murals.

 

Philadelphia has some great graffiti...are there some really good taggers in Los Angeles, Blue?

Edited April 19, 2015 by methodwriter85

[methodwriter85]

Hey, if you're about my age/Blue's age, you probably remember Andrew Keegan, best known for starring as the conceited jerk in Julia Stiles and Heath Ledger's teen romantic comedy, 10 Things I Hate About You.

 

He's now founded his own religion.

 

Seriously, what is it with California and all these religious off-shoots? 

 

Blue, have you ever been approached by these alternative religion types? I would love to see what your reaction was. LOL.

 

Maybe we could have a storyline where JJ gets recruited into a cult, and the family rallies to save him. I can't see it being Will, Marie, Darius, or John...JJ's the only one I can see being able to get brainwashed.

 

Kidding. I can't see Mark ever touching cults.

Edited April 20, 2015 by methodwriter85

[B1ue]

I'm not rude, if that's what you are implying. I've only turned the hose on one, and that was because he stated my six-month old niece that had just died went to hell.

 

Couldn't tell you why they crop up. At a guess, it has to do with the number of people that are on their own out here, divorced by distance from their upbringing. But since that doesn't really apply to me, it's only a guess.

[methodwriter85]

I'm not rude, if that's what you are implying. I've only turned the hose on one, and that was because he stated my six-month old niece that had just died went to hell.

 

No, I wasn't thinking you'd be rude, but I imagined your facial expressions would be hilarious. (Sorry for that loss, by the way. I've been an uncle since I was 9 years old and I can only imagine.)

 

We had a guy called Kirkbridge Jesus Guy at University of Delaware. He would sit outside Kirkbridge Hall, on the sidewalk, and preach his religious views to us. I think there was more than one. The main guy has been doing it since at least the late 1990's, I think. Apparently he finally left.

 

Although watching that clip made me wonder...were L.L. Bean backpacks really popular where you went to high school/college, Blue? There were pretty much ubiquitous at University of Delaware, along with Northface. (Which has been replaced by Patagonia, apparently.) Kind of like the standby item for preppy high school and college students.

Edited April 21, 2015 by methodwriter85

[B1ue]

Not at my high school, although where I lived was primarily on the lower end of the income brackets. At college, I didn't really pay attention.

Edited April 21, 2015 by B1ue

[methodwriter85]

Not at my high school, although where I lived was primarily on the lower end of the income brackets. At college, I didn't really pay attention.

 

I tended not to notice in college as well, but looking at the video reminded me of them.

 

Anyway...

 

 

Buzzfeed does a shit ton of videos on L.A. This video seems REALLY sprung on Griffith Park. I would totally do a ghost hunt in the abandoned zoo.

Edited April 21, 2015 by methodwriter85

[methodwriter85]

Alright, this one's for our NorCal people!:

 

 

I'm scared of driving on roads that have more than 3 lanes, and I'm scared of heights, so yeah, I would have never done this. LOL.

 

Have you been to SF since the new span opened, Mark?

[methodwriter85]

Hey Mark, in honor of it being your birthday, I thought it might be cool for you to check out this clip that depicts High School Life, Circa 1980 at a California High School.

 

 

I hope that brought back a lot of flashbacks of fun high school memories.

 

Similar in vein...check out this video of a 1981 Gunn High School basketball game:

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rRW_x6grZdw

 

Damn, you can just FEEL the money in that program.

 

As an aside, I'm glad feathered hair wings on guys made a comeback during my late adolescence. It looked good in 1980, and it looked good in 2005. Did you ever wear your hair like that, Mark?

Edited May 13, 2015 by methodwriter85

[methodwriter85]

So, the reason why Los Angeles has such a bland skyline is because in 1974, it was decreed that all new skyscrapers had to have helicopter pads on top, leading to typical boxy, flat-topped skyscrapers. It was repealed in 2014, which means that Los Angelenos might finally someday get a skyline that could rival San Francisco's. (Well, probably not, but still.)

 

Historically, Los Angeles has favored sprawl and low-height buildings. It'll be interesting to see if Los Angeles will make a bold turn towards high-rises and higher-density development, and more creative architecture. It probably won't ever rival New York City, but eh...it could get interesting.

 

Do you guys think that Phoenix's skyline kind of resembles Los Angeles's circa the 1980's? I remember reading somewhere that they filmed a movie set in 80's Los Angeles for that reason- Phoenix resembles 80's Los Angeles.

[PrivateTim]

This is why we don't build high rises in LA.

 

 

[methodwriter85]

What the hell was with that awful wig they put on Victoria Principal? I remember the first time I saw that movie, I thought there was an earlier draft of the movie where the character she was playing was a street-smart black woman, but they lost the black part but dressed her like Pam Grier in Coffy anyway.

 

I'm kinda surprised they didn't reboot Earthquake, but then again the concept has been done many times over, as seen in the latest effort.

 

I'm kind of surprised that Private Tim didn't defend L.A.'s skyline. I remember his husband Matthew K going on a tear about how Los Angeles is NOT pro-low density and how all these skyscrapers were getting built. LOL.

 

Anyway..check out the gorgeous UCLA Campus in this video:

 

 

This will apparently be Zach's home for the next four years.

Edited May 16, 2015 by methodwriter85

[TetRefine]

I'm kind of surprised that Private Tim didn't defend L.A.'s skyline. I remember his husband Matthew K going on a tear about how Los Angeles is NOT pro-low density and how all these skyscrapers were getting built. LOL.

 

Well you can't really defend a skyline as ugly as LA's. Leave it to us East Coasters to build build sexy skylines. 

[methodwriter85]

Well you can't really defend a skyline as ugly as LA's. Leave it to us East Coasters to build build sexy skylines. 

 

To be fair though, Chicago has a great skyline as well. San Francisco's skyline is pretty cool as well.

 

Los Angeles, San Jose, Phoenix...those are pretty meh.

Edited May 17, 2015 by methodwriter85

[B1ue]

Our people are prettier though. I'll take that instead.

[TetRefine]

Our people are prettier though. I'll take that instead.

 

To an extent, true. I'd say only New York could rival you on that one. 

 

I've always just thought of West Coast cities (maybe except SF) as too decentralized and un-pedestrian to build the kind of truly dense and "urban canyon" type downtowns that BosWash does. 

 

Not necessarily a bad thing per say, just different depending on taste. 

Edited May 18, 2015 by TetRefine

[methodwriter85]

Blue, is the Lumbersexual look a thing in California, or is it just an East Coast thing? It can be mistaken for the hipster look, but the idea is that you're like a rugged lumberjack, and more of an earthy look:

 

Confessions of A Lumbersexual (Time Magazine, November 2014)

 

I can see JJ and Stefan being absolutely horrified at thought of this being sexy:

 

 

The look seems very popular for whatever reason right now- going into the whole current "big bushy beard" trendy going on right now. Anyway, the term is relatively new, coined on Urban Dictionary in 2010, and gaining media notice in 2014.

 

I wonder if Zach would become a lumbersexual on the off-season from football with a big bushy beard and lots of plaid....which CAP characters can you see becoming lumbersexual?

 

 

In any event, I feel like the 20-something/30-something guy who is clean-shaven and without any tattoos or piercings is becoming a rare breed indeed. LOL. I can claim the last two but even I tend to rock scruff, because I'm too lazy to shave every day. We're a long way from the Queer Eye look that was so popular and so, so JJ.

[B1ue]

I see some guys with that kind of look, yes. But not many. It doesn't seem to be gaining much traction.

[PrivateTim]

I can see JJ and Stefan being absolutely horrified at thought of this being sexy:

 

Any sane person would be horrified at that look.

 

I've never seen a male look that way in West Hollywood or Silverlake.....  maybe a lesbian or two.

[methodwriter85]

Any sane person would be horrified at that look.

 

I've never seen a male look that way in West Hollywood or Silverlake.....  maybe a lesbian or two.

 

This is like the softer, celebrity-friendly version of the look:

 

 

Honestly though, it's kind of hard to differentiate between this look and hipsters.

 

I do think some guys can pull it off, like MLB prospect/Triple A-Leaguer Daniel Norris:

 

 

 

It's funny, without the beard, I think he looks like a loveable college slacker:

 

 

 

I guess it is more of an East Coast thing. TetRefine has bitched about how much he hates this look. LOL.

Edited May 21, 2015 by methodwriter85

[methodwriter85]

 

 

I missed this last week, but SF can't be the next Manhattan. It is physically impossible. I've mentioned it before, but the geology of San Francisco puts pretty severe restrictions on the kind of buildings that can go up, and where, and that's before you factor in earthquakes.

 

The idea of the Manhattanization of San Francisco goes back to the 1970's and 1980's, when people were worried about the big cement highrises like the Transamerica, and that it would turn SF into a mini-version of Manhattan, away from its heritage of Mediterrean-style buildings on hills.

 

There are places in SF where super-tall skyscapers can go up....they're currently building Transbay Tower, which will be over a 1,000 feet tall, and according to this article, there's a new wave of Manhattanization coming.

 

    Anyway, on the other side of the state...do you guys see some kind of move towards L.A. trying to be more like Manhattan, as this article suggests?

 

Why The Rush to Manhattanization? (Los Angeles Times, February 2015)

 

It's funny. Philadelphia also wants to create a Times Square for their city, too.

Edited May 21, 2015 by methodwriter85

[PrivateTim]

This is like the softer, celebrity-friendly version of the look:

 

 

Honestly though, it's kind of hard to differentiate between this look and hipsters.

 

Plaid isn't flannel and a lot of celebrities grow beards between productions to "hide".

 

 

    Anyway, on the other side of the state...do you guys see some kind of move towards L.A. trying to be more like Manhattan, as this article suggests?

 

Why The Rush to Manhattanization? (Los Angeles Times, February 2015)

 

It has nothing to do with LA wanting to be Manhattan, but with developers wanting to build big buildings, the city council to stem white flight and increase the tax base.

[methodwriter85]

It has nothing to do with LA wanting to be Manhattan, but with developers wanting to build big buildings, the city council to stem white flight and increase the tax base.

 

Yeah, that was kind of the point of the article more than anything- the big money isn't in single-family subdivisions, duplexes, or 3-story apartment buildings. The big money are in skyscapers, and it's a time when less people are demanding to live in big single

-family homes with a lawn, and there's renewed interest in urban lifestyles. (I was about the date- it's actually from 2007. I wonder how the author reacted to the housing crash, and if that impacted the move towards skyscapers in Los Angeles.)

 

This blog argues that a better model for Los Angeles to follow would be Tokyo:

 

On The Manhattanization of Los Angeles (February 2015)

 

I mean, is there this concern in Los Angeles that all the single-family homes will get bulldozed over to make skyscrapers? That doesn't really make a lot of sense, as this article argues. It does seem like it's inevitable that Los Angeles has to build up if they want to keep growing at the high rate they've always grown out. There's nowhere left to expand the suburbs, are there?

[PrivateTim]

Yeah, that was kind of the point of the article more than anything- the big money isn't in single-family subdivisions, duplexes, or 3-story apartment buildings. The big money are in skyscapers, and it's a time when less people are demanding to live in big single

-family homes with a lawn, and there's renewed interest in urban lifestyles. (I was about the date- it's actually from 2007. I wonder how the author reacted to the housing crash, and if that impacted the move towards skyscapers in Los Angeles.)

 

This blog argues that a better model for Los Angeles to follow would be Tokyo:

 

On The Manhattanization of Los Angeles (February 2015)

 

I mean, is there this concern in Los Angeles that all the single-family homes will get bulldozed over to make skyscrapers? That doesn't really make a lot of sense, as this article argues. It does seem like it's inevitable that Los Angeles has to build up if they want to keep growing at the high rate they've always grown out. There's nowhere left to expand the suburbs, are there?

 

Have you ever actually been to LA? The City of LA is 469 square miles. Manhattan is 33 square miles. There are no single families homes I know of in the core downtown area. What is being torn down are old industrial buildings, even at that at the pace they are building it would 100 years for even downtown to look like Manhattan. There is plenty of room left to build more single family homes in the hills, but there won't be large family tracts like there was at the end of WWII when the Valley still had farms and orchards.

[B1ue]

I assume he means the neighborhoods just outside the core, like South Central, Echo Park, Eagle Rock areas.

 

Also, yes, there's quite a bit of room left to build suburbs to the east of the Greater LA area. I'm not sure why people imply or outright state there isn't. The ocean is a limiting factor, as are the mountains (sort of), but that limit was hit in the 70s. Hasn't seemed to slow anything down.

 

It has nothing to do with LA wanting to be Manhattan, but with developers wanting to build big buildings, the city council to stem white flight and increase the tax base.

Er... stem White flight? Aren't they about 40 years too late for that?

 

Do you mean reverse White flight?

[methodwriter85]

Er... stem White flight? Aren't they about 40 years too late for that?

 

Do you mean reverse White flight?

 

I'm guessing. I remember your comments about how the rich white founding families wrote off Los Angeles proper as a loss fifty years ago. LOL.

 

There is gentrification happening, so I guess it's working?

 

The Gentrification of Skid Row

 

Skid Row, according to the article, is rather resistant to any real gentrification attempts.

 

Anyway, to move this to happier stuff....

 

Disneyland is Celebrating 60th Anniversary

 

Disneyland just always seemed so quaint next to Disney World. I don't think I know anybody from the East Coast who actually went to Disneyland over Disney World.

 

Back when Daisy and I were plotting JJ's career, we always thought it would have been hilarious for him to have a puff video piece of him taking one of his nieces or nephews (or Little Cousin Courtney) to Disneyland. I would pay to see Disneyland JJ smile for the cameras, and then scream at a kid for spitting on his designer shoes as soon as the cameras were off.

 

I'm assuming both Private Tim and Blue likely spent a lot of time there as children. I mean, I probably would, too. I had to make do with Dorney Park/Hersey Park/Six Flags Over Texas, though.

Edited May 22, 2015 by methodwriter85