Do any of you on here sometimes feel like they're missing out on part of life because you're a roadgeek? Let me try and explain what I mean a little bit.
When walking around a new place as a tourist, I find myself license plate spotting instead of looking at the sights. ... I've been leading mission trips to México, and spend more time planning the drive than thinking about, praying about, and planning the actual work. ... Sometimes, I would rather surf on Google Maps than spend time interacting with people.
Every so often, the idea creeps up in my mind that I'm just a little bit off the mark, that life isn't quite supposed to be this way. Of course, I'm not saying I think it's crazy to have a hobby, or that everybody should look at life the same way. But has anyone here ever had the feeling that roadgeekery has actually given you a blurry/slanted/unhealthy view of the world, and that you're somehow missing out on something more fundamental about life–even just a little bit?
Maybe the answer is no, and you think I'm a heretic. But, if the answer is yes, have you tried any refocusing? If so, then how?
I have had this feeling from time to time. I don't have it very often in relation to roadgeeking in general, but I spend most of my time on a very narrow segment of the hobby--extracting and collating pattern-accurate sign design sheets--which tends to encourage goal-oriented behavior and a sense of dissatisfaction when the goals are not reached. In a typical month I can easily extract more than 1000 of these sheets, all from construction plans sets for highways, while working with multiple state DOTs: "Must finish WSDOT today. Must finish TxDOT tomorrow. Must finish MnDOT the day after," that sort of thing.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.sabre-roads.org.uk%2Fwiki%2Fimages%2Ff%2Ff2%2F0902-48-628-0192.png&hash=bbf44b4457e16b5d4c42f54058427a7bd7373165)
Since the feeling of being locked onto a single track precludes a sense of contentment, this is what I try to do:
* I pursue a broad range of interests. I got into roadgeeking (as the activity is understood by the community at large, not my narrow segment of it) originally when I day-tripped to art museums, so I try to ensure that I take advantage of free Saturday admission at the Wichita Art Museum at least once a month, and I try to visit whatever major art museums are on offer in any major city I happen to be in. For instance, when I am in Kansas City I always try to visit the Nelson-Atkins. Sometime this autumn I would like to take a weekend trip to Bentonville to see the Crystal Bridges museum.
* Set aside time to read for enjoyment.
* Ensure that you set aside time every day to pursue activities that are both physical and breed a sense of contentment. There is a theory (loosely derived from evolutionary biology) which holds that activities that come closest to what we have been evolved to do over the past million or so years are the most likely to make us feel contented. That includes walking under trees and using tools to prepare your own food. Wichita does not have natural woodland, so I try to approximate forest strolls by walking in parts of the neighborhood that have mature landscaping, and dinner--which I usually try to fix from scratch--is normally my responsibility.
* Combine variations in your routine with opportunities for creative expression. Within the narrow context of roadgeeking, sometimes I ignore the sign design sheet chase for a while and spend some time drawing my own signs in CorelDRAW, or go through old photos. I also try to write in a diary from time to time.
* Seek human contact: stay in touch with friends, don't pass up an opportunity to hug a loved one, etc.
Sometimes. I often wish that I had time to do stuff while I'm busy clinching stuff. Actually did when I recently visited Whiteface Mountain during a road trip, and I'm planning on use Railroads on Parade to justify another. I might make visiting local destinations a part of road trips for now on, though probably for the ones further from home mainly. Doing this would also give me more opportunities to clinch roads in Canada, since I'd have the normal tourist reasons for visiting to give customs.
I concentrate on what interests me and ignore what bores me. I don't waste my time thinking about what I'm not interested in. I don't try to force myself to fit into boxes and pay attention to what I'm "supposed" to.
I try to fit it into my day sometimes, like taking a different route home than normal if I want to see if a sign is still there. Being a car guy, I also do the occasional "well, I want to see how the car handles in this situation, and I want to check this sight out", so that gives me two goals in one trip.
This gives me another opportunity to speak ill of the dead. :-D
One of my travel hobbies is county collecting. After the Poughkeepsie meet a few years ago, my plan was to spend the night in Nyack, NY. I saw an opportunity to clinch all five counties that make up New York City. I posted, in the usual places, questions about the best routes to use to accomplish this and asked what kind of traffic one could expect along those routes on a typical fall Saturday evening.
A certain well-known now-deceased racist responded with wisecracks about me not wanting to stay and visit any museums in the city, go to any of the tourist attractions, etc.
I had, and have, no desire to visit New York City. My only purpose in traveling through the city was to collect the counties. Otherwise I'd have been content to check into my motel room in Nyack and relax for the evening.
When I'm traveling, I will often pass by noteworthy tourist attractions because to me, the trip is its own purpose.
I spent 2 days in Florida back in March. I went to the beach, but missed a few other sights. Partially because I was playing it by ear, partially because I was exploring the roads. Ideally, I'd love to find a balance: spend some time seeing the sights and some time just driving around.
I've been know to go out of my way for certain sights, but also to drive certain roads.
Mine mainly comes from me feeling like I'm moving to quickly on the road- if I take a whirlwind trip through a bunch of states, I enjoy it but I see all these other things I would have liked to have seen.
I do make clinching interstates my lowest priority because of that- I typically only use them for early morning/late night treks to get to somewhere I've never been via somewhere I've been, and then I avoid driving in new places during darkness but a lot of the time I still feel like I'm missing out. I try to avoid eating at chains, or at least restaurants that I can eat at at home for the same reason.
Like HB, I'd have no desire to see New York City- I typically bypass cities whenever possible (or just jump on the interstate through them unless I'm clinching a certain route). My desires are typically more scenery related- I'd love to have time to get out and hike and get off the road and see some stuff, breathe the air, that sort of thing. I don't really care about people, unless I'm out to see somebody specific. At some point, if I ever had the time and were in good enough shape, I'd love to bike across the country, but I don't foresee that ever actually happening. I'll probably be too old to do that by the time I have a couple months to burn.
There are times that I will pass something -- a scenic overlook or something else that looks interesting -- and I will begrudgingly have to pass it by because I'm on a tight schedule and I want to be somewhere by a certain time.
The general response seems to be 'I try to fit a little bit of normal life in along with my roadgeeking'. Is anyone considering switching the dominance? I may not be doing a good job of explaining a nebulous thought.... Maybe, at the end of your life, you might say to yourself, 'Well, I amassed quite a number of road signs, and clinched a lot of highway mileage, but where did my life go?'.
I think to myself every so often, To most people, a road is just a road; maybe there's something to that.
Oh, well, whatever, burn me at the stake (and thank you for not, by the way).
I like to think that roadgeeking is a subset of the rest of my life- I work fifty hours a week and go to school full time, and when I do have time off I like to get out of town, because I can go months without leaving Tucson/Phoenix.
Roadgeeking is definitely a major part of my life, but I wouldn't say it defines it. Everybody has hobbies- somebody who fixates on skiing or fishing or video-gaming or something misses out on a lot of things that aren't skiing or fishing or video-gaming. I don't think you'll ever find a perfectly well-rounded individual that enjoys everything equally. If amassing a number of road signs and clinching highway mileage makes you happy, then do it. This hobby is unconventional, but it's just that, a hobby. Everybody's passions are weird in a certain light and probably lend to a distorted view of reality. This is a tough one, because it's tough to go into a bar and tell a girl about your passion for road signs- but if you parlay that into a general love for travel and leave out the "yeah, I've driven every mile of state highway in Arizona and love road signs" part at first, finding something that you and a non-roadgeek can enjoy to discuss the same thing, that works.
And then socially you just have to let there be a balance- I've cancelled/rescheduled road trips on numerous occasions so that I could do fun, entirely non-road related things with friends. I don't think that's something unique with this hobby though; I think that's something that would apply with any interest. There's times when I'd rather be on the road, and then I go on the road if I can. And then there's times I'd rather do something fun with people with a roadtrip as a backup, and then I do that instead.
And honestly, if I die and say "I amassed quite a number of road signs, and clinched a lot of highway mileage," that's pretty cool in its own light. How many people can say they've done that? I would like to get married and settle down and maybe have kids at some point, hopefully incorporating my road enthusiasm into that life as much as possible, but beyond that I think I'd be perfectly content having died with the knowledge that I had a good time driving highways.
Quote from: kphoger on September 15, 2012, 10:28:00 PMMaybe, at the end of your life, you might say to yourself, 'Well, I amassed quite a number of road signs, and clinched a lot of highway mileage, but where did my life go?'
The real point of that question and related observations (such as, "Nobody dies wishing they had spent more time at the office") is not that there is a collection of activities which in and of themselves justify a life as well spent. Rather, it is an attempt to communicate (in Socratic form) the nature of mortality itself. When you die, that is that: you don't get any extensions and you don't get any do-overs. So is
this (whatever
this is) what you want to be looking back at when you are lying on your deathbed? This is a question which every individual has to answer for himself or herself. Although it is possible to say that certain activities, considered from this vantage point, are more likely to give satisfaction than others, it is fundamentally a judgment call.
QuoteI think to myself every so often, To most people, a road is just a road; maybe there's something to that.
Oh, well, whatever, burn me at the stake (and thank you for not, by the way).
Personally I am kind of disappointed that most of this thread seems to have slipped into the frame of "to clinch or not to clinch." Why make a big point of never seeing New York City, for example? (To me it almost sounds like H.B. can't forgive New York because Randy Hersh lived in the metropolitan area and liked it.) The underlying question is much broader than that. Personally, I never felt roadgeeking made much sense as a competitive sport, which is effectively what it evolves into when the custom of comparing your travels with others' (especially in quantitative terms--highways clinched, counties collected, etc.) becomes entrenched. Interpersonal comparisons of utility are fraught but, even so, it is highly suspect to equate box-ticking with satisfaction.
I am not generally interested in what counties or even states I have visited, though I love travels on the road for the sake of the road, and I have driven most of I-95, including its terminii in Miami and Houlton, Maine.
But for seeing beyond the road, nothing is better for that than the rural parkways (and I have not driven all of them), such as the Blue Ridge Parkway/Skyline Drive combination, the Colonial Parkway, and even the George Washington Memorial Parkway (largely suburban in nature).
The Blue Ridge Parkway and Skyline Drive were designed to allow easy stopping as often as desired, and the posted speed limit is a fairly slow 45 MPH.
Quote from: J N Winkler on September 15, 2012, 11:31:12 PM(To me it almost sounds like H.B. can't forgive New York because Randy Hersh lived in the metropolitan area and liked it.)
Nothing that personal. I also would not want to spend any appreciable amount of time in the downtowns of Chicago, Washington DC, Atlanta, Los Angeles, San Francisco, or any other large town. I just spent three nights in downtown Louisville and hated it. I spent five nights at the Renaissance in DC about nine years ago at a conference and felt like I was a prisoner in the hotel because it wasn't feasible for me to jump in my truck and drive somewhere anytime I wanted to eat or kill an evening.
In general, I don't like cities because I like rural areas and open roads. Give me rural Kentucky (or Kansas or Virginia or anywhere else) over a metro area. And I hate the beach. I'd go to the mountains before I went to the beach anytime of year.
I don't like crowds, and I don't like traffic jams. To me, whatever is going on is not worth the hassle of getting there. I've turned down numerous opportunities to attend ballgames, concerts, NASCAR races, etc. -- things I enjoy watching on TV -- because I can't be transported Star Trek-style into a private box away from the crowd, and then transported out when the event's over. Had I attended last year's Sprint Cup race at Kentucky Speedway, I would probably either be dead from suicide or in prison for murder because of the traffic jams. I don't have fears or phobias about crowds. I just don't like the aggravation inherent in being in one.
I don't need to see the Statue of Liberty in person. (Although my wife may be attending a book signing in NYC next month and she wants to do some sightseeing while she's there including Lady Liberty.) I've seen photos. That's plenty good enough for me. In my youth I saw a number of historic sites such as Appomattox, Williamsburg, Jamestown and Yorktown, and went to places like the Smithsonian, Library of Congress, etc.
I don't view clinching highways or visiting counties as being competitive, even though I do keep score on mob-rule.com of the counties I visit. I'm not out to top the number of counties that Jeff K. or Doug K. or Froggie visit. It's just something I enjoy doing.
H.B.--thank you for your reply.
It is certainly true that tastes differ, and also that nobody arrives at a cosmopolitan outlook as a result of a hard sell.
In regard to the competitive aspect of clinching, I don't actually think it is being able to compare oneself to Froggie, Doug Kerr or whoever that is really the problem (although some of the relevant sites, like Mob-rule.com, push out the comparative data to the user, making them more readily accessible than might otherwise be the case). I think it is the process of keeping score itself that triggers a drive to accumulate that can easily take away from a sense of satisfaction.
90% of what I enjoy is roads. It's what brings me on vacations all over the country. I also enjoy seeing: natural scenery, local history or unique museums, beautiful architecture, and other kitsch/Americana (like the World's Largest Umpire in Iowa). I will try to weave these sights in between roads. Except for museums, I tend to just drive by everything. I never liked taking house tours. I took 10 minutes to photograph everything I wanted at Niagara Falls, while most people allow an hour or two minimum. I'd rather fill my time with roads, but I'll take time to see the things I want in addition. I don't think it's at all a problem. To each his own, and my own is roads.
I have exactly the opposite mindset of H.B. with regards to urban versus rural. I tend to think that there is nothing of interest out in the country other than roads and scenery, and if I am going to spend time exploring in more detail or stopping to check out something not road-related, it's going to be in a city.
In response to the original question, I'd say roadgeeking is a hobby to me, and while I love it, there is a lot more to me and my life beyond it. So I don't need an intervention. :P
My original thought wasn't so much that the hobby of roadgeeking can be a hobby that takes up too much of your time and energy–nor that it's a poor hobby of choice. Rather, it's that it can take over your participation in "normal" life. When you see an ad on TV, you notice the incorrect highway shield but ignore everything else about it. When you take a scenic drive, the concrete expansion joints and U-channel sign posts become the scenery, not the natural beauty or impressive architecture around you. When you notice a glaring error in signage or striping that a DOT has made, it upsets you more than nearly anything else in life. Sometimes, don't you wonder if your mind is somehow missing the mark? if there's a part of being human that you're missing out on?
As I said: to most people, a road is just a road.
Thank you all for your responses thus far. I was curious to see if anyone else's roadgeeking silver lining also had a cloud.
Maybe the "normals" are the ones missing out on roads, signs, bridges, etc.
While I do put some effort into planning my travels so as to be able to add to my CHM .list file and color in more mob-rule.com counties, I feel like my trips have just the right balance (for me) of the clinching with other things to do and see. I can't count the number of interesting things I've gotten to see and do because I took a new route to include unclinched counties and highways along the way. And the roads themselves are interesting to me as well. So no regrets there!
If anything, I sometimes feel a little bad about the cumulative time I've spent organizing my road signs image collection. It takes some time to put together a 2.3 MB raw HTML file that's 76,000+ lines long, but that's over many years now. And it's not even a nice web page - just a bunch of links and captions in tables. But even with that, I enjoy working on it when time permits, and it never takes priority over any of the truly important things in my life.
Quote from: kphoger on September 17, 2012, 02:27:42 PM
Rather, it's that it can take over your participation in "normal" life. When you see an ad on TV, you notice the incorrect highway shield but ignore everything else about it.
If it weren't that, it would be
"why did they blank out the make and model logos of that car?" or
"come now, no sane person parks their classic car in an airport parking lot" or
"that crap only happens in the movies"...some other pre-occupation might take the place of another one.
Quote
As I said: to most people, a road is just a road.
To which I say: Yes, and the road takes us to places, whether individually or personally. It allows me to dream, pretend, work, earn, discover, hunt, gather, smile, enjoy, express myself, or be just another fish in the sea. And yet, I also take an interest in the nuts and bolts (the process, history, and definition) of the why the road is a road. It's just another interest, I like to know how things work, and I enjoy balancing that with the artistic aspect of photographing it, too.
I enjoy my time with others, but I like my time alone, too. I'm as comfortable in the big cities as I am in the most rural areas...but some people and co-workers I enjoy spending off-clock time with, and others who'd rather just talk about work after work...well, I'd rather hit the road and listen to music and see the sights.
I have a mobrule account, but I don't count counties. I keep the account so I can see where I've been on a map. I have "froggied" counties only once or twice in my life. I am a fanatic state collector (I'm only up to 28, but they're all medium sized or large states) but I really don't care about counting counties.
Yes, I admit to feeling a certain inadequacy in some of my travels as far as properly interacting with the land and people I'm seeing. And it's not in terms of some perceived expectation of the "right" way to travel: when I read something like Blue Highways, I do genuinely wish that I could bring myself to have that kind of intimate and comprehensive experience in my journeys. But sometimes, even when I'm on the back roads, I selfishly find myself racking up more miles, more towns, more different routes at the expense of the landscape they contain. Still, practical realities often preclude spending enough time for a real Blue Highways experience; maybe at another age I'll find a way to slow my pace to that level!
I have been fortunate to travel extensively in my work, spending days, a week, even a month or two, in places all over the U.S. In so doing, I have relished the experience of living within the fabric of these places as a visitor, but not a tourist. Some of the places are destinations in their own right, but a great many are much more mundane places, ones most people would never think to make a point of visiting, and that's given me a valuable appreciation for the wide range of communities that are found right in my own country. Since I'm not in charge of my own itinerary, my time is more focused on just living in the situation I find myself in, and that's been a thrill.
As for the idea of H.B. never caring to see NYC, which comes up every now and then when we evaluate our own interests in travel, I admit to having a predictable gut reaction to the idea. I can't personally conceive of having such a remarkable destination as NYC available to me without feeling a strong imperative to see it personally. And I feel the same about rural or natural sights like the Grand Canyon, Alaska, or the Blue Ridge Parkway, as well as run-of-the-mill locales like Tulsa or Texarkana; I do genuinely feel that any place I haven't been is worth seeing.
But on further reflection I have come to accept a couple of things regarding this. One, of course, is that H.B. and I have pretty much opposite preferences on just about everything, beyond our shared interest in roads and all that. I mention that not to pick on him, but rather as an example of the way our travels bring us into contact with a wide range of people–types of folks who, if we limit our experience too much, can seem to inhabit only some far-away fiction that doesn't apply to our own life. But from our travels, we learn that people everywhere make up different dimensions of our society, and we gain a better understanding of what that society really is, instead of just what we perceive it to be.
The second realization is that I myself actually have a similar opinion about a number of places, mostly outside the U.S., as foreign travel in general has a lesser appeal to me than domestic. A great example is China, which I had the opportunity to visit and was grateful for the chance. But I'm also grateful that I got to see it the way I did: by ship, spending a day or an overnight in each of a few different ports, returning to the ship for meals and lodging, then moving on to the next stop without having to deal excessively with the daunting differences in language, culture and so forth. I saw the Great Wall, Forbidden City, Shanghai skyscrapers, and Hong Kong, rode the bullet train and ate at a Chinese McDonald's, but by no means did I deeply penetrate the experience of that country in any serious way. Still, I'm glad to have seen the place, and I feel more than fulfilled at having done so the way I did, with absolutely no personal need to see any more of it than I have.
So in summary, I do indeed take the point about "seeing beyond the road": I do feel that there are some who practice roadgeeking in a way that seems less than fulfilling by my own personal standards, but I also feel there is more I could gain from my own travels, in terms both of goals I'd like to achieve, and those that really hold no great calling for me. I guess that makes me a pretty average traveller along the great roadtrip of life.
HB hates anything that he perceives as Democratic. Even though Bloomberg rules New York with an iron fist.
The whole US 66 hype focuses on the attractions on the side of the road and not the road itself. That's part of the reason I think of US 66 as just another US route, even though I can see it from my front door.
And Tulsa is way nicer than Texarkana. The culture is much better here. In a little over a week, a single venue, Cain's Ballroom, is hosting Down and the Smashing Pumpkins, two quality shows in a short amount of time. When was the last time that happened in Texarkana?
I'll explain myself like this- either I'm at work, the bowling alley, at home, or on the road.
My advice is- do whatever makes you happy. For me, roadgeeking is one of those things I've done for a long time. If I never had fun with that, I never would have even lurked at this fine forum for two years before joining! But I am having fun, and I hope you all too are having fun with what you do!
Quote from: bugo on September 18, 2012, 01:35:04 AM
HB hates anything that he perceives as Democratic. Even though Bloomberg rules New York with an iron fist.
The whole US 66 hype focuses on the attractions on the side of the road and not the road itself. That's part of the reason I think of US 66 as just another US route, even though I can see it from my front door.
And Tulsa is way nicer than Texarkana. The culture is much better here. In a little over a week, a single venue, Cain's Ballroom, is hosting Down and the Smashing Pumpkins, two quality shows in a short amount of time. When was the last time that happened in Texarkana?
I can't agree with you more about Bloomberg, as much as I love New York.
Quote from: hbelkins on September 16, 2012, 01:23:00 AM
Quote from: J N Winkler on September 15, 2012, 11:31:12 PM(To me it almost sounds like H.B. can't forgive New York because Randy Hersh lived in the metropolitan area and liked it.)
Nothing that personal. I also would not want to spend any appreciable amount of time in the downtowns of Chicago, Washington DC, Atlanta, Los Angeles, San Francisco, or any other large town. I just spent three nights in downtown Louisville and hated it. I spent five nights at the Renaissance in DC about nine years ago at a conference and felt like I was a prisoner in the hotel because it wasn't feasible for me to jump in my truck and drive somewhere anytime I wanted to eat or kill an evening.
H.B., I have mixed feelings about the above. On the one hand, cities do have
some redeeming features, such as cultural (and sometimes civic) activities not available elsewhere, on the other hand, I
absolutely respect your desire to omit crowding and traffic congestion from your life.
And
that is what separates me from the so-called Smart Growth industry, and promoters of so-called vibrant, livable and "carfree" urban culture. Most true believers in these activities want to use the power of government at the local, state and national levels to force as many people as possible to live that lifestyle, even though it is pretty obvious to me that a significant percentage of the population of most advanced nations (including the United States) simply do not want that urban (and mobility-constrained) way of living.
Quote from: bugo on September 18, 2012, 01:35:04 AM
And Tulsa is way nicer than Texarkana. The culture is much better here. In a little over a week, a single venue, Cain's Ballroom, is hosting Down and the Smashing Pumpkins, two quality shows in a short amount of time. When was the last time that happened in Texarkana?
No idea, as I've never been to Texarkana. But it's not a comparative, and while I do enjoy Tulsa quite a lot after a couple of weeklong visits, I'd still want to see Texarkana, even if I know for sure it was a lousier place than Tulsa. That's pretty much my entire point in bringing it up, actually.
What I'm trying to say is that everyone has their own perspective. On roadtrips, some notice scenery, some notice cities and towns, some notice cars, some notice roads, some notice birds and other wildlife. Riding in a car is sensory overload, and there's no way you can take it all in. So I concentrate on what interests me.
Texarkana strikes me as a mid-sized town with a full freeway bypass. Reminds me of some Kentucky cities like a smaller version of Owensboro or Bowling Green, or maybe Richmond.
Tulsa is a big city.
Jeremy's perception of my likes/dislikes is offbase, but Bloomturd isn't the reason I have no burning desire to visit NYC.
Texarkana is a big small town. Tulsa is a real city with a skyline. Texarkana's metro population is 143,027, while Tulsa's is nearly a million at 998,438. Texarkana is, how you say, a bit of a dump while Tulsa has a lot of really nice areas. To compare the two is like comparing apples and oranges.
I would never, ever want to live in New York, and I don't think I'd like the chaos or overcrowding, but I'd still like to visit one day just for the experience. I've visited other big cities and there were plenty of things to keep me busy. I'd like to visit there just because it's so different from what I'm used to.
Quote from: bugo on September 18, 2012, 09:54:23 AM
Texarkana is a big small town. Tulsa is a real city with a skyline. Texarkana's metro population is 143,027, while Tulsa's is nearly a million at 998,438. Texarkana is, how you say, a bit of a dump while Tulsa has a lot of really nice areas. To compare the two is like comparing apples and oranges.
No comparison intended, besides the fact that I'd be equally interested in visiting both, had I been to neither, despite the fact that neither is considered a must-visit by the average populace.
Quote from: bugo on September 18, 2012, 09:16:43 AM
What I'm trying to say is that everyone has their own perspective. On roadtrips, some notice scenery, some notice cities and towns, some notice cars, some notice roads, some notice birds and other wildlife. Riding in a car is sensory overload, and there's no way you can take it all in. So I concentrate on what interests me.
And that's the same for me. What interests me is visiting ordinary places as much as those that draw far more travelers.
Quote from: empirestate on September 18, 2012, 12:38:48 PM
Quote from: bugo on September 18, 2012, 09:54:23 AM
Texarkana is a big small town. Tulsa is a real city with a skyline. Texarkana's metro population is 143,027, while Tulsa's is nearly a million at 998,438. Texarkana is, how you say, a bit of a dump while Tulsa has a lot of really nice areas. To compare the two is like comparing apples and oranges.
No comparison intended, besides the fact that I'd be equally interested in visiting both, had I been to neither, despite the fact that neither is considered a must-visit by the average populace.
Texarkana has some interesting roads, but is otherwise boring and everything worth seeing can be seen in an hour. Tulsa has interesting roads, museums, clubs, and a lot of other things that would take a few days thoroughly explore. If you're lucky to be here when a good show is playing at Cain's, then absolutely go. It's a historic club with a great atmosphere. I'm seeing Down at Cain's tomorrow night and the Smashing Pumpkins a week from Friday. We don't usually get 2 good concerts in 2 weeks, but we get good shows several times a year. The last show I went to was Puscifer back in December. Tulsa is thought of as being a cowtown, but it isn't anymore and it is more interesting than most east or west coasters would imagine.
Quote
And that's the same for me. What interests me is visiting ordinary places as much as those that draw far more travelers.
Often times I'll go on a roadtrip and 10 minutes after I get there, I'll want to go exploring. I love to drive and the longer the trip, the better. I may be in the minority, but I love driving on rural freeways. Driving on the open road is so soothing and relaxing, especially if the speed limit is 75 or more and traffic is light. Driving down 2 lane roads with few passing chances and slow cars in front of me is a nightmare. There's a time and a place for driving on 2 lane highways, but it's a pain if you're just trying to get somewhere.
Quote from: bugo on September 18, 2012, 12:50:33 PM
I may be in the minority, but I love driving on rural freeways. Driving on the open road is so soothing and relaxing, especially if the speed limit is 75 or more and traffic is light. Driving down 2 lane roads with few passing chances and slow cars in front of me is a nightmare.
Agreed. I don't understand why some people love two lane roads. They must not mind the traffic and slower speeds.
Quote from: deanej on September 18, 2012, 12:56:53 PM
Quote from: bugo on September 18, 2012, 12:50:33 PM
I may be in the minority, but I love driving on rural freeways. Driving on the open road is so soothing and relaxing, especially if the speed limit is 75 or more and traffic is light. Driving down 2 lane roads with few passing chances and slow cars in front of me is a nightmare.
Agreed. I don't understand why some people love two lane roads. They must not mind the traffic and slower speeds.
That's exactly it- on a rural freeway you just sort of drive by everything and see a Bennigan's with a giant sign off the freeway every once in a while. I want to see the small towns and enjoy the sights. I don't care if I'm driving a little bit slower- I just plan on it ahead of time, and as long as I'm still on my planned schedule I'm okay- I only get antsy when the two lane road moves slower than I expected.
Rural freeways definitely have their purpose- I do enjoy driving on them, but it's a wholly different experience. It's like comparing a McDonald's cheeseburger to a gourmet burger. They're both delicious and they're both hamburgers, but it's really hard to compare them side by side.
Commenting on this, I am a student of geography (at one time literally) and I have always enjoyed ventures into the other places that aren't Indianapolis to explore the communities and land features of the surrounding area. Last year I took two trips into Ohio to explore a combination of roads and communities as well as county clinching. In this case, it was less about the highways and more about the towns. I too like the regular communities and any time I'm in a county seat I usually pull over to take some pictures and walk around the downtown and around the courthouse. For the Ohio trip, the only interstates I was on was in the Columubs area, but that was only because I wanted to clinch I-270 and parts of I-71.
This year I'm doing the same thing only with Michigan and in years past I've done Kentucky and Illinois. In this case the Michigan trip was more highway-based, along US 31, 131 and I-75, but the component of stopping in many of the communities, plus seeing the local scenery was still present. I've seen most Indiana counties and their communities, so my trips within Indiana these days comprise mostly of highway pictures, many for this website, while my trips out of state will have this combination of seeing the communities and highways. The further away the community, the more likely I will stop and walk around it given that I may not return for a long time.
As for driving on the road, in the case of the Ohio and Michigan trips, I will travel the interstates to get to those locations and I will more than often do so at night, waking up around 4 or so in the morning and heading out there so I can cross the state line at sunrise and starting the true part of the trip. At the end of the day, I hope of crossing back over into my own state at sunset with nothing less to take pictures of as I take the quickest way back home.
Quote from: deanej on September 18, 2012, 12:56:53 PM
Quote from: bugo on September 18, 2012, 12:50:33 PM
I may be in the minority, but I love driving on rural freeways. Driving on the open road is so soothing and relaxing, especially if the speed limit is 75 or more and traffic is light. Driving down 2 lane roads with few passing chances and slow cars in front of me is a nightmare.
Agreed. I don't understand why some people love two lane roads. They must not mind the traffic and slower speeds.
I
sometimes love them. Not always, but I think most of us can probably understand how you get sick of taking the same route all the time and you want to find other ways to go, or you just get tired of mixing it up with the trucks and the tailgaters out on the Interstate and so the two-lane road can be a respite from that.
No doubt part of one's opinion on this sort of thing might be influenced by where you live and what your normal experience out on "rural" (or perhaps "less urban" might be more appropriate in some places!) highways is like. bugo's comment about being on the open road with a speed limit of 75 or more being relaxing is a good example–here on the East Coast there's only one road with a 75-mph speed limit and it's not one most people ever have reason to use because of its location (I-95 from Bangor to Houlton). The other thing that gets to me is that even on the more rural Interstates on the East Coast–for example, this past Saturday Ms1995hoo and I went out to a winery in Linden, Virginia, via I-66–you encounter so many left-lane hogs and other annoyances that the rural Interstate isn't as relaxing as it should be. I get to the point where since I know many drivers either fear two-lane roads or avoid non-Interstates in general I find that the two-lane road can be more relaxing, and indeed when we left the winery on Saturday I opted for VA-55 instead of I-66 for precisely that reason.
But ultimately for me it kind of gets to the point of asking how far out of my way I'm willing to go and how much time I'm willing to add to the trip. Once I start balancing that equation the type of road becomes more important–100 extra miles via the Interstate is a lot less added time than 100 miles via two-lane roads through the mountains, you know? I need to make a trip to Ohio in a couple of weeks and I've been trying to figure out the best "scenic route" for the trip home (for the trip out we'll go the direct way via I-70 because we need to get there at a particular time). Taking US-50 straight across West Virginia has crossed my mind, but it's all two-lane road once you're east of I-79 and there aren't a lot of passing zones and I think on a Sunday afternoon when we need to go to work the next day that might be too much added time, to the point where I wonder if it makes more sense to take US-35 down to Charleston, then Interstates 64 and I-81 via Beckley, Clifton Forge, and Lexington.
When I drive on a decent 2 lane road, I want to drive 75 anyway.
Sometimes that's true for me too, sometimes not. Really just depends on where I am and where I'm going at the time.
I think there are plenty of two-lane roads I use regularly that are perfectly decent roads but aren't suitable for 75 mph (especially not at night due to concerns about deer).
Wow, this has disintegrated into a combination NYC/Texarkana/road type prefence/speed limit thread.
Maybe it's only reinforcing my original thought–that we're unable to rise above the hobby, that it's actually an obsession.
:confused:
For me, it's the allure of not just taking the roads, but seeing how things differ, from the scenery to the signage. I was amazed going to Texas the first time and seeing their frontage road system for interchanges. I was fascinated by the different typeface used on Georgia's BGSs. In Colorado, it was driving across the mountains, in Mississippi it was driving along the beach. Seeing a network of signed secondary routes in Virginia floored me, the same was true for Missouri's lettered highways. Interstate, two-lane, city, rural, it doesn't matter to me. Every road has its quirks along it.
It's a combination of all the little things.
The best option is an old four-lane bypassed by the Interstate. Such as US 441 between Ocala and Gainesville.
Quote from: NE2 on September 18, 2012, 04:04:31 PM
The best option is an old four-lane bypassed by the Interstate. Such as US 441 between Ocala and Gainesville.
Even better is one that has been completely decommissioned. They are rare, but they are out there.
As far as indulging this hobby too much is concerned, I do often resent the text that tells me how much time I've spent logged in to AA Roads. I don't really need a reminder of that.
Quote from: bugo on September 18, 2012, 12:50:33 PM
Texarkana has some interesting roads, but is otherwise boring and everything worth seeing can be seen in an hour.
Well, again, that's exactly my point. To me, part of what's interesting about a place is often the boring stuff left over after you've seen everything worth seeing. The things I remember about Tulsa weren't prominent attractions like Cain's, but simple things like grabbing some coffee or a beer, or trying to find lunch or antique computer equipment at midday in the downtown district. Just seeing what makes the place tick, how its people and neighborhoods are subtly different from everywhere else in this supposedly homogenous country. And yes, I like to see the sights too!
Quote from: bugo on September 18, 2012, 12:50:33 PMTulsa is thought of as being a cowtown, but it isn't anymore and it is more interesting than most east or west coasters would imagine.
Tulsa's a great town, and your last remark was pretty spot on for me before I first went. It's actually much more cosmopolitan than OKC in my view, partly because of its longer history. I didn't go to Cain's (interestingly, since music is my profession I don't often seek it out as recreation), but I did note its presence and importance.
If anyone's curious, here are my impressions of Tulsa as first recorded in blog form:
http://tumbleweedsheldon.blogspot.com/2007/12/hundred-years-sooner.html
And OKC, by contrast:
http://tumbleweedsheldon.blogspot.com/2007/10/oct_18.html
Quote from: bugo on September 18, 2012, 12:50:33 PM
Texarkana has some interesting roads, but is otherwise boring and everything worth seeing can be seen in an hour.
www.alpsroads.net/roads/tx/i-30
www.alpsroads.net/roads/tx/us_59
www.alpsroads.net/roads/tx/us_71
www.alpsroads.net/roads/tx/us_82
www.alpsroads.net/roads/tx/viaduct
www.alpsroads.net/roads/ar/i-30
www.alpsroads.net/roads/ar/us_67
www.alpsroads.net/roads/ar/us_71
www.alpsroads.net/roads/ar/ar_245
www.alpsroads.net/roads/ar/ar_296
www.alpsroads.net/roads/ar/cr_138
www.alpsroads.net/www/tx/texark
www.alpsroads.net/www/tx/ar
www.alpsroads.net/www/tx/union
www.alpsroads.net/www/ar/texark
www.alpsroads.net/www/ar/tx
www.alpsroads.net/www/ar/beech_st
www.alpsroads.net/www/ar/broad_st
www.alpsroads.net/www/ar/tex_auto
Oh, sorry, as you were.
Quote from: Darkchylde on September 18, 2012, 03:52:15 PM
For me, it's the allure of not just taking the roads, but seeing how things differ, from the scenery to the signage. I was amazed going to Texas the first time and seeing their frontage road system for interchanges. I was fascinated by the different typeface used on Georgia's BGSs. In Colorado, it was driving across the mountains, in Mississippi it was driving along the beach. Seeing a network of signed secondary routes in Virginia floored me, the same was true for Missouri's lettered highways. Interstate, two-lane, city, rural, it doesn't matter to me. Every road has its quirks along it.
It's a combination of all the little things.
When I was a kid and we traveled to a new state, I was always fascinated to see what the state route markers looked like. Even as a 20-something and my dad, brother and I went out west and were coming back home down I-29 and we ducked into Nebraska near Sioux Falls just to enter the state, I was disappointed that we didn't see any Nebraska state route markers on the route we took. When I found Jim Lin's site with all the state route markers posted, in my earliest forays into the Web, I was very happy.
So this has been an interest of mine since childhood.
Quote from: hbelkins on September 18, 2012, 09:04:29 PM
When I was a kid and we traveled to a new state, I was always fascinated to see what the state route markers looked like. Even as a 20-something and my dad, brother and I went out west and were coming back home down I-29 and we ducked into Nebraska near Sioux Falls just to enter the state, I was disappointed that we didn't see any Nebraska state route markers on the route we took. When I found Jim Lin's site with all the state route markers posted, in my earliest forays into the Web, I was very happy.
Each time I got to see what a new state's marker looked like, I would draw it around the corresponding page number in my road atlas. It still strikes me how much less information was readily available to us at the time; you actually had to go all the way to a state to see what its route shields looked like, not because the technology didn't exist to disseminate the info (i.e., books), but because it just wasn't important enough for anybody to bother compiling and publishing a comprehensive guide.
Quote from: empirestate on September 18, 2012, 10:34:07 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on September 18, 2012, 09:04:29 PM
When I was a kid and we traveled to a new state, I was always fascinated to see what the state route markers looked like. Even as a 20-something and my dad, brother and I went out west and were coming back home down I-29 and we ducked into Nebraska near Sioux Falls just to enter the state, I was disappointed that we didn't see any Nebraska state route markers on the route we took. When I found Jim Lin's site with all the state route markers posted, in my earliest forays into the Web, I was very happy.
Each time I got to see what a new state's marker looked like, I would draw it around the corresponding page number in my road atlas. It still strikes me how much less information was readily available to us at the time; you actually had to go all the way to a state to see what its route shields looked like, not because the technology didn't exist to disseminate the info (i.e., books), but because it just wasn't important enough for anybody to bother compiling and publishing a comprehensive guide.
I had a list roughly 80% complete of each state's markers and 95% accurate of where all the US highways and Interstates went. I needed this list to draw maps - I preferred not to reuse existing highway numbers so that the place would be truly fictional, and enjoyed drawing them all over the country. Finding this information online was an incredible moment.
Quote from: Steve on September 18, 2012, 11:27:11 PMI had a list roughly 80% complete of each state's markers and 95% accurate of where all the US highways and Interstates went. I needed this list to draw maps - I preferred not to reuse existing highway numbers so that the place would be truly fictional, and enjoyed drawing them all over the country. Finding this information online was an incredible moment.
Long before there was a Web, let alone James Lin's page, it was possible to order a leaflet from FHWA which contained, in addition to pattern-accurate renderings of the "new" symbol signs (which came out in 1972!), drawings of state route markers from all 50 states.
Ordering it, however, meant knowing (1) that it existed at all and (2) which address to write to for further information--before the Internet, both of these things were nearly impossible without being already in the loop somehow for traffic-related material. I do have a copy of this leaflet, but I don't think I obtained it until after I had already learned of the
MUTCD through online sources.
The Internet has made things much better, but it also sets the bar higher. The problem has changed from not knowing what various states' route markers look like to not having fully dimensioned drawings of them for all 50 states (cases in point: Louisiana guide-sign marker; Montana state secondary route marker . . .).
In a way, I think sometimes the roadgeek bug enhances our view of scenery, interesting places, etc. because we end up in places that a "normal" traveler wouldn't be. If we weren't into roads/clinching counties, chances are we wouldn't have visited most of the places we have. I would not know what the Panhandle of Oklahoma looks like, because I have never had any reason to go there but to collect the three counties comprising it. I would not know what Dill City, Oklahoma looked like, because the only reason I went there was to clinch OK-42. I wouldn't have ever been to Yates Center, Kansas, because I would have just stuck to the Kansas Turnpike instead of taking US-75. I wouldn't have ever been to Lake Keystone because I wouldn't have been on the old alignment of US-64 that literally leads into it.
Quote from: Scott5114 on September 19, 2012, 03:22:31 AM
In a way, I think sometimes the roadgeek bug enhances our view of scenery, interesting places, etc. because we end up in places that a "normal" traveler wouldn't be. If we weren't into roads/clinching counties, chances are we wouldn't have visited most of the places we have. I would not know what the Panhandle of Oklahoma looks like, because I have never had any reason to go there but to collect the three counties comprising it. I would not know what Dill City, Oklahoma looked like, because the only reason I went there was to clinch OK-42. I wouldn't have ever been to Yates Center, Kansas, because I would have just stuck to the Kansas Turnpike instead of taking US-75. I wouldn't have ever been to Lake Keystone because I wouldn't have been on the old alignment of US-64 that literally leads into it.
A very good point. A roadgeek's travels do frequently take him farther off the beaten path than most people–and I'm a fan of getting off the beaten path. But, while you were there (say, in the Oklahoma panhandle), did you actually
see it or
experience it to the same level that most people would have? By which I mean how much of your attention was on the road and how much of it was on the human element? I think most people focus little attention on the actual road, and more on the human element; and I wonder if that makes us somehow antisocial.
Quote from: Scott5114 on September 19, 2012, 03:22:31 AM
In a way, I think sometimes the roadgeek bug enhances our view of scenery, interesting places, etc. because we end up in places that a "normal" traveler wouldn't be. If we weren't into roads/clinching counties, chances are we wouldn't have visited most of the places we have. I would not know what the Panhandle of Oklahoma looks like, because I have never had any reason to go there but to collect the three counties comprising it. I would not know what Dill City, Oklahoma looked like, because the only reason I went there was to clinch OK-42. I wouldn't have ever been to Yates Center, Kansas, because I would have just stuck to the Kansas Turnpike instead of taking US-75. I wouldn't have ever been to Lake Keystone because I wouldn't have been on the old alignment of US-64 that literally leads into it.
This is generally how I feel. I've never felt like my interest in roadgeek stuff limits my enjoyment of anything else while traveling. So many people see traveling as just point A to point B. They really don't know or don't care where they've been inbetween. I've always felt like I have an advantage over those people in enjoying a trip because I feel like I benefit from knowing just exactly where I've traveled. And I've never been so engrossed in roadgeek stuff on a trip that I don't enjoy the scenery-stop to see sights, etc.
Some of the differences among roadgeeks that we see here comes from differences in how we approach the whole roadgeek phenomenon. There are different things that lead us to have an interest in roads, signs and the like. For me, it is a love of geography and of traveling. I think an interest in roads naturally follows. But since my interest in roads follows from my general interest in geography and traveling, it means that my interest in geography and traveling is first. Thus, I am not going to let an interest in roads interfere with my interest in seeing the sights. Also, I have other interests besides roadgeeking, one of which is an interest in history(I was a history major in college). So I'm certainly not going to go on a trip and be so engrossed in roadgeeking stuff that I'm going to miss out on anything of an important historical nature anywhere I am going.
Basically, roadgeeking to me is more of a means to an end and not an end in itself. Rather than limiting my enjoyment of anything, I feel it enhances it.
I like driving, so I like to keep moving when I am on roadtrips. I hate to stop, and I usually don't stop at scenic turnarounds or other touristy places.
Quote from: Scott5114 on September 19, 2012, 03:22:31 AM
I wouldn't have ever been to Lake Keystone because I wouldn't have been on the old alignment of US-64 that literally leads into it.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm5.staticflickr.com%2F4003%2F4382738105_7710c7431e_z.jpg&hash=1296e562422ccd9f2ab45b0523fe5bec826f90c5)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm5.staticflickr.com%2F4026%2F4382740199_334f365976_z.jpg&hash=821cbff9fb9d0eff2977ec2a54294c6c793e7ef1)
Quote from: kphoger on September 19, 2012, 09:03:05 AM
Quote from: Scott5114 on September 19, 2012, 03:22:31 AM
In a way, I think sometimes the roadgeek bug enhances our view of scenery, interesting places, etc. because we end up in places that a "normal" traveler wouldn't be. If we weren't into roads/clinching counties, chances are we wouldn't have visited most of the places we have. I would not know what the Panhandle of Oklahoma looks like, because I have never had any reason to go there but to collect the three counties comprising it. I would not know what Dill City, Oklahoma looked like, because the only reason I went there was to clinch OK-42. I wouldn't have ever been to Yates Center, Kansas, because I would have just stuck to the Kansas Turnpike instead of taking US-75. I wouldn't have ever been to Lake Keystone because I wouldn't have been on the old alignment of US-64 that literally leads into it.
A very good point. A roadgeek's travels do frequently take him farther off the beaten path than most people–and I'm a fan of getting off the beaten path. But, while you were there (say, in the Oklahoma panhandle), did you actually see it or experience it to the same level that most people would have? By which I mean how much of your attention was on the road and how much of it was on the human element? I think most people focus little attention on the actual road, and more on the human element; and I wonder if that makes us somehow antisocial.
What is the "human element", though? I ate lunch in Guymon. Is that enough to "experience" it? How far do I have to go to meet that bar? Do I have to stop at a museum? Is there any way to 'experience' a town that doesn't have anything like that? Do I have to seek out the local greasy spoon and chat with the overall-wearing guys that inhabit it and hunt down random residents and talk to them about what living in Boise City is like? (Not likely to happen...I have trouble with talking to strangers in Norman, much less the Panhandle.) I'm not all that interested in that sort of thing–chances are they are farmers or ranchers and I'm already familiar that lifestyle because of growing up in Goldsby.
I stayed two nights in DC in 2007. I looked at the Treasury Building, the White House, the Capitol, the Lincoln and Jefferson Memorials, and the Washington Monument. I had a brief encounter with a DC resident, who said that she hoped I enjoyed my visit to the city. Did I experience DC even though I was just sightseeing in the touristy part of town, and never went in any of the buildings? I bought a camera at Staples. Does that change anything? On the way out of town I made a wrong turn and briefly ended up in Anacostia. Does that enhance my experience?
One town that I feel like I truly experienced was Ann Arbor, Michigan, which I consider to be the town that I've visited that has had the greatest contrast from Norman. I have a friend who lived there at the time, who gave me a rather thorough tour of the place and brought us to several great restaurants and interesting bits of local culture. But the only way I had that experience was because I knew someone there to guide me to the places that are worth seeing. I don't have a friend that is able or willing to do that in most cities.
I think the key thing to remember here is that as much as we play up the differences, a lot of places are really rather similar. You live in Wichita and I live in Norman, but we probably both shop at Walmart and sometimes eat at McDonalds and Red Lobster. We get office supplies from places like Office Depot or Staples and probably keep our money in places like Chase or Bank of America. (Even Ann Arbor had at least a Five Guys.) I don't go to downtown every day and ride a boat down the canal–I did it once and that was enough for me, though if I had someone in from out of town I'd probably offer to take them on the canal, since that's something different to do that you don't have in every city. But it's not part of the everyday OKC experience. And isn't that the experience you're really wanting to know about?
Quote from: Scott5114 on September 19, 2012, 03:22:31 AM
In a way, I think sometimes the roadgeek bug enhances our view of scenery, interesting places, etc. because we end up in places that a "normal" traveler wouldn't be. If we weren't into roads/clinching counties, chances are we wouldn't have visited most of the places we have.
One of my favorite drives I've ever taken was over White Pass, and I would never have had a reason to go there if I weren't clinching US 12 in the state and/or taking pictures for Wikipedia.
Quote from: Scott5114 on September 19, 2012, 11:57:19 PM(Even Ann Arbor had at least a Five Guys.)
Tulsa is getting a Five Guys. It's going to be at 96th and Riverside, across the road from the Jenks bridge. If Tulsa is getting one, I wouldn't be surprised if OKC did too.
Quote from: bugo on September 20, 2012, 02:19:57 AM
Quote from: Scott5114 on September 19, 2012, 11:57:19 PM(Even Ann Arbor had at least a Five Guys.)
Tulsa is getting a Five Guys. It's going to be at 96th and Riverside, across the road from the Jenks bridge. If Tulsa is getting one, I wouldn't be surprised if OKC did too.
Norman has had one for a while. The point I intended to make is that even Ann Arbor, which plays itself up as being full of unique, independent places, can't avoid the chain restaurants.
Quote from: kphoger on September 15, 2012, 10:42:17 AM
Do any of you on here sometimes feel like they're missing out on part of life because you're a roadgeek? Let me try and explain what I mean a little bit.
I have had over 30 major interests during my life, many of which could be called a "hobby". Usually only about 5 or so are in the "forefront" at any one time.
Road transportation is probably the longest and most consistent, 40 years.
No, I don't think I am missing out on part of life due to roads interest ... too many other things to stimulate!
Quote from: Scott5114 on September 19, 2012, 11:57:19 PM
Quote from: kphoger on September 19, 2012, 09:03:05 AM
Quote from: Scott5114 on September 19, 2012, 03:22:31 AM
In a way, I think sometimes the roadgeek bug enhances our view of scenery, interesting places, etc. because we end up in places that a "normal" traveler wouldn't be. If we weren't into roads/clinching counties, chances are we wouldn't have visited most of the places we have. I would not know what the Panhandle of Oklahoma looks like, because I have never had any reason to go there but to collect the three counties comprising it. I would not know what Dill City, Oklahoma looked like, because the only reason I went there was to clinch OK-42. I wouldn't have ever been to Yates Center, Kansas, because I would have just stuck to the Kansas Turnpike instead of taking US-75. I wouldn't have ever been to Lake Keystone because I wouldn't have been on the old alignment of US-64 that literally leads into it.
A very good point. A roadgeek's travels do frequently take him farther off the beaten path than most people–and I'm a fan of getting off the beaten path. But, while you were there (say, in the Oklahoma panhandle), did you actually see it or experience it to the same level that most people would have? By which I mean how much of your attention was on the road and how much of it was on the human element? I think most people focus little attention on the actual road, and more on the human element; and I wonder if that makes us somehow antisocial.
What is the "human element", though?
I don't have a concrete answer for you. As I said, this is a fairly nebulous thought. But, I think it has to do with the way in which we primarily think about the world. When I think of Boise City, I immediately think of the downtown traffic circle/square; Tulsa, the expressways; Guymon, how long it takes to drive US-54 through town, and the sign salad north of town at the junction of OK-136; Liechtenstein, yellow shoulder lines and white center line; most places, where they are located on the map. Other facets of society–what the people are like, relative wealth or poverty, politics of the area, social norms, etc.–come to mind secondarily. I can't help but think that I have it backwards.
Quote from: kphoger on September 20, 2012, 02:04:28 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on September 19, 2012, 11:57:19 PM
Quote from: kphoger on September 19, 2012, 09:03:05 AM
Quote from: Scott5114 on September 19, 2012, 03:22:31 AM
In a way, I think sometimes the roadgeek bug enhances our view of scenery, interesting places, etc. because we end up in places that a "normal" traveler wouldn't be. If we weren't into roads/clinching counties, chances are we wouldn't have visited most of the places we have. I would not know what the Panhandle of Oklahoma looks like, because I have never had any reason to go there but to collect the three counties comprising it. I would not know what Dill City, Oklahoma looked like, because the only reason I went there was to clinch OK-42. I wouldn't have ever been to Yates Center, Kansas, because I would have just stuck to the Kansas Turnpike instead of taking US-75. I wouldn't have ever been to Lake Keystone because I wouldn't have been on the old alignment of US-64 that literally leads into it.
A very good point. A roadgeek's travels do frequently take him farther off the beaten path than most people–and I'm a fan of getting off the beaten path. But, while you were there (say, in the Oklahoma panhandle), did you actually see it or experience it to the same level that most people would have? By which I mean how much of your attention was on the road and how much of it was on the human element? I think most people focus little attention on the actual road, and more on the human element; and I wonder if that makes us somehow antisocial.
What is the "human element", though?
I don't have a concrete answer for you. As I said, this is a fairly nebulous thought. But, I think it has to do with the way in which we primarily think about the world. When I think of Boise City, I immediately think of the downtown traffic circle/square; Tulsa, the expressways; Guymon, how long it takes to drive US-54 through town, and the sign salad north of town at the junction of OK-136; Liechtenstein, yellow shoulder lines and white center line; most places, where they are located on the map. Other facets of society–what the people are like, relative wealth or poverty, politics of the area, social norms, etc.–come to mind secondarily. I can't help but think that I have it backwards.
But how many people think of anything when they think of Boise City? You at least kind of know what it looks like- I'd bet well over half the population doesn't know it exists, and most of the other rest just knows it's a city on the panhandle. It's not like being a roadgeek is forcing you to miss out on knowledge you would otherwise have- odds are if you didn't like roads you wouldn't think of anything when you thought of Boise City.
And since you've at least driven through it, I bet you know a bit more about social aspects of Boise City than most- you probably know it's an agriculture town, gives off a vibe that it's barely clinging on as a remote outpost. If you bought gas or went into a convenience store to use the bathroom, you might have noticed that slight Texas panhandle- rural plains accent. The courthouse circle tells you that it's a city that took pride in its county courthouse- and that like many rural Texas towns, the courthouse is the focal point of the city. These are things that somebody who has never even been wouldn't feel. You might be consciously focusing on the roads, but I bet you're subconsciously aware of more than you think.
For me, if I'm discussing the experience with a roadgeek, the road things come to mind. If my mother asks me what I thought of Boise City, the first thing that comes to mind is going to be what I was subconsciously processing as I drove through. Maybe I can't speak in a lot of depth, but not many people can anyway.
Quote from: corco on September 20, 2012, 02:32:55 PM
But how many people think of anything when they think of Boise City? You at least kind of know what it looks like- I'd bet well over half the population doesn't know it exists, and most of the other rest just knows it's a city on the panhandle. It's not like being a roadgeek is forcing you to miss out on knowledge you would otherwise have- odds are if you didn't like roads you wouldn't think of anything when you thought of Boise City.
And since you've at least driven through it, I bet you know a bit more about social aspects of Boise City than most- you probably know it's an agriculture town, gives off a vibe that it's barely clinging on as a remote outpost. If you bought gas or went into a convenience store to use the bathroom, you might have noticed that slight Texas panhandle- rural plains accent. These are things that somebody who has never even been wouldn't feel.
Ah, but it's very possible to love travelling and not be a roadgeek. My father was with me at the time we drove through Boise City (in fact, I don't remember if I was old enough to drive at the time), and I would bet you he remembers more than just the traffic circle. Remember, I'm not trying to bash roadgeeking per se–simply to suggest that it might be a narrow window through which to view the world. I certainly am not trying to start an argument. I was just curious if anyone else had ever felt that way.
I think there's definitely validity to what you're saying- I just think everyone is weird. Put a few different people in a car through Boise City
1. Roadgeek- notices roads, maybe subconsciously processes the rest
2. Travel-lover- probably notices roads a little bit, focuses more on sociodemographics.
3. Middle ground- knows where they are, doesn't mind it, engaged in conversation- gets a little exposure to everything without getting a lot of exposure to anything.
4. Apathetic to travel- may sort of realize they were there, more focused on getting out of town than getting through it. Probably is talking to their friend, not paying much attention to what's going on.
5. Hates travel- watches DVD while going through town, doesn't even know they were in Boise City
Which one of those people is processing incorrectly? I think you could make an argument that all of them are, and that none of them are. Even if you exclude roads as being a "priority," everybody is neglecting somebody. The topophiles are probably neglecting their fellow passengers and moving more slowly, wasting time in the eyes of others, and the topophobes are talking to their friends or watching a movie and maybe learning something new/staying entertained, moving quickly, and not processing what they're seeing.
Quote from: corco on September 20, 2012, 02:32:55 PM
But how many people think of anything when they think of Boise City?
Now that the truck trarffic is elimtanted, there's no reason for its existence.
I've never been to Boise City, but I recall a goofy Car and Driver article where one of them (I assume it must have been John Phillips) drove a Smart Fortwo there.
Ah, I remember that article...I recall they mentioned a snake museum and the pronunciation of the town name. They occasionally still discuss driving and road trips, but seemingly less so as the years go by...losing roughly 40 pages an issue in the past decade marginalized some of the off-beat stuff.
Quote from: Kacie Jane on September 20, 2012, 01:03:32 AM
One of my favorite drives I've ever taken was over White Pass, and I would never have had a reason to go there if I weren't clinching US 12 in the state and/or taking pictures for Wikipedia.
I'm totally necroing this thread, just to note that one can see
a lot just by sticking to one numbered route which isn't a freeway. for example, US-6 is a great drive across the country... I wholeheartedly recommend such an activity to anyone who wants to see the world. Pick a number, and go.
as for missing out, really the one worst thing one can do is stay on the interstate, especially I-80 in Nebraska, which gives the entire Eisenhower system the stereotypical "connecting nothing to nowhere, really quickly" reputation. Just five miles away is US-30, which is infinitely more interesting.
Quote"Besides," said the man, "there's no traffic passes through 6. If you want to go to Chicago you'd do better going across the Holland Tunnel in New York and head for Pittsburgh," and I knew he was right. It was my dream that screwed up, the stupid hearthside idea that it would be wonderful to follow one great red line across America instead of trying various roads and routes.
Quote from: Scott5114 on September 19, 2012, 11:57:19 PM
What is the "human element", though? I ate lunch in Guymon. Is that enough to "experience" it? How far do I have to go to meet that bar? Do I have to stop at a museum? Is there any way to 'experience' a town that doesn't have anything like that? Do I have to seek out the local greasy spoon and chat with the overall-wearing guys that inhabit it and hunt down random residents and talk to them about what living in Boise City is like? (Not likely to happen...I have trouble with talking to strangers in Norman, much less the Panhandle.) I'm not all that interested in that sort of thing–chances are they are farmers or ranchers and I'm already familiar that lifestyle because of growing up in Goldsby.
I stayed two nights in DC in 2007. I looked at the Treasury Building, the White House, the Capitol, the Lincoln and Jefferson Memorials, and the Washington Monument. I had a brief encounter with a DC resident, who said that she hoped I enjoyed my visit to the city. Did I experience DC even though I was just sightseeing in the touristy part of town, and never went in any of the buildings? I bought a camera at Staples. Does that change anything? On the way out of town I made a wrong turn and briefly ended up in Anacostia. Does that enhance my experience?
One town that I feel like I truly experienced was Ann Arbor, Michigan, which I consider to be the town that I've visited that has had the greatest contrast from Norman. I have a friend who lived there at the time, who gave me a rather thorough tour of the place and brought us to several great restaurants and interesting bits of local culture. But the only way I had that experience was because I knew someone there to guide me to the places that are worth seeing. I don't have a friend that is able or willing to do that in most cities.
I think the key thing to remember here is that as much as we play up the differences, a lot of places are really rather similar. You live in Wichita and I live in Norman, but we probably both shop at Walmart and sometimes eat at McDonalds and Red Lobster. We get office supplies from places like Office Depot or Staples and probably keep our money in places like Chase or Bank of America. (Even Ann Arbor had at least a Five Guys.) I don't go to downtown every day and ride a boat down the canal–I did it once and that was enough for me, though if I had someone in from out of town I'd probably offer to take them on the canal, since that's something different to do that you don't have in every city. But it's not part of the everyday OKC experience. And isn't that the experience you're really wanting to know about?
This is one of the most illuminating points on this thread. I also feel compelled to add my own take on this (a month later)--
I think being roadgeeks allows us to see beauty in places and objects that others tend to find banal or ugly. What may be a horrific tangle of concrete and asphalt to some may be a masterwork of the applied arts to us. While an extensive array of green signs may be just background texture that slips from most commuters' everyday notice, to us it can be the drumbeat that gives continuity to and defines the rhythm of spatial/temporal creations that we consciously experience (consciously, because that is something we focus on). No piece of land or object on the landscape is inherently more or less worthy of anyone's attention. Beauty is something that only the individual observer can rightly take from something and give to himself or herself, and it follows that being roadgeeks is our gift to ourselves, just as nature lovers, train enthusiasts, bird watchers, or localized cuisine aficionados present such gifts to themselves. And while one may argue that we're roadgeeks not because we find roads
beautiful but because we find them
fascinating, I think the two concepts overlap more than they are dissimilar.
I think Scott's post alludes to the idea that the Generic City is most often the
human experience of places--and this need not be a malady to be somehow corrected or stamped out. If being a roadgeek gives us a gift here, it is that it allows us to see elements that are interesting or unique in landscapes that are popularly deemed boring or "cookie-cutter" (or, my least favorite, "placeless"). We can discover our own sensibilities, our own aesthetics, through our interest in the topic in question, however esoteric it may be. And we should not discount the potential of road enthusiasm as a gateway to other enthusiasms. While it can be true that a roadgeek misses something that others travel hundreds of miles to see, the same is true of those who see roads in purely utilitarian terms.
Besides, how many others would ever give more than a brief moment's thought to Breezewood, Pennsylvania?
Quote from: stridentweasel on October 18, 2012, 11:24:43 PM
This is one of the most illuminating points on this thread. I also feel compelled to add my own take on this (a month later)--
I think being roadgeeks allows us to see beauty in places and objects that others tend to find banal or ugly. What may be a horrific tangle of concrete and asphalt to some may be a masterwork of the applied arts to us. While an extensive array of green signs may be just background texture that slips from most commuters' everyday notice, to us it can be the drumbeat that gives continuity to and defines the rhythm of spatial/temporal creations that we consciously experience (consciously, because that is something we focus on). No piece of land or object on the landscape is inherently more or less worthy of anyone's attention. Beauty is something that only the individual observer can rightly take from something and give to himself or herself, and it follows that being roadgeeks is our gift to ourselves, just as nature lovers, train enthusiasts, bird watchers, or localized cuisine aficionados present such gifts to themselves.
That's probably why more than a few roadgeeks like the northern segments of the New Jersey Turnpike, even though Looking for America on the New Jersey Turnpike (http://www.amazon.com/Looking-America-New-Jersey-Turnpike/dp/0813519551) asserted that it is "so bad that it's good," making specific reference to the petroleum processing operations in Carteret and the general "look and feel" of Elizabeth (a large swath of which was condemned when the Turnpike was constructed) and past Newark Liberty International Airport.
Quote from: stridentweasel on October 18, 2012, 11:24:43 PM
And while one may argue that we're roadgeeks not because we find roads beautiful but because we find them fascinating, I think the two concepts overlap more than they are dissimilar.
I think Scott's post alludes to the idea that the Generic City is most often the human experience of places--and this need not be a malady to be somehow corrected or stamped out. If being a roadgeek gives us a gift here, it is that it allows us to see elements that are interesting or unique in landscapes that are popularly deemed boring or "cookie-cutter" (or, my least favorite, "placeless"). We can discover our own sensibilities, our own aesthetics, through our interest in the topic in question, however esoteric it may be. And we should not discount the potential of road enthusiasm as a gateway to other enthusiasms. While it can be true that a roadgeek misses something that others travel hundreds of miles to see, the same is true of those who see roads in purely utilitarian terms.
Another attraction of the New Jersey Turnpike is the great contrast in landscapes from south to north. There's not much in the way of hills and dales along the Turnpike, but the landscape of Salem County is about as extreme in its rural appearance as the industrialization that's present as the motorist drives further north.
Quote from: stridentweasel on October 18, 2012, 11:24:43 PM
Besides, how many others would ever give more than a brief moment's thought to Breezewood, Pennsylvania?
If not for the danger and inconvenience of the place (to benefit a few well-connected Pennsylvania land owners), it would not bother me so much.
Quote from: stridentweasel on October 18, 2012, 11:24:43 PM
I think being roadgeeks allows us to see beauty in places and objects that others tend to find banal or ugly [...] to us it can be the drumbeat that gives continuity to and defines the rhythm of spatial/temporal creations that we consciously experience...
Stepping aside somewhat, the masses of numbers and words we encounter and remember from roadgeeking, evoke a picture in my mind, helping to serve as a mnemonic when having to recall a certain number(s). The experience to travelling road numbered
foo or
bar come in handy to having to remember
foo-bar (or bar-foo) later on. That's not to say that the numbers couldn't come from some other personal interest or importance, but it does help me in a realm outside the road-and-highway world.
Quote from: NE2 on October 15, 2012, 09:30:44 PM
Quote"Besides," said the man, "there's no traffic passes through 6
I've always wondered about that quote. what did all the trucks take across northern Pennsylvania? no Turnpike in 1937... did they choose US-20 instead?
Quote from: cpzilliacus on October 19, 2012, 07:33:34 AM
Quote from: stridentweasel on October 18, 2012, 11:24:43 PM
This is one of the most illuminating points on this thread. I also feel compelled to add my own take on this (a month later)--
I think being roadgeeks allows us to see beauty in places and objects that others tend to find banal or ugly. What may be a horrific tangle of concrete and asphalt to some may be a masterwork of the applied arts to us. While an extensive array of green signs may be just background texture that slips from most commuters' everyday notice, to us it can be the drumbeat that gives continuity to and defines the rhythm of spatial/temporal creations that we consciously experience (consciously, because that is something we focus on). No piece of land or object on the landscape is inherently more or less worthy of anyone's attention. Beauty is something that only the individual observer can rightly take from something and give to himself or herself, and it follows that being roadgeeks is our gift to ourselves, just as nature lovers, train enthusiasts, bird watchers, or localized cuisine aficionados present such gifts to themselves.
That's probably why more than a few roadgeeks like the northern segments of the New Jersey Turnpike, even though Looking for America on the New Jersey Turnpike (http://www.amazon.com/Looking-America-New-Jersey-Turnpike/dp/0813519551) asserted that it is "so bad that it's good," making specific reference to the petroleum processing operations in Carteret and the general "look and feel" of Elizabeth (a large swath of which was condemned when the Turnpike was constructed) and past Newark Liberty International Airport.
....
A
Car and Driver article once used the memorable description "miles and miles of universal fart" in referring to that area. I'll concur in that description because on one trip to New York, I rode with my brother and he insisted on keeping the windows down.....and then we got stuck in stopped traffic on the Goethals Bridge. I don't think I've come so close to puking from just a bad smell as I did that afternoon.
I think your comments underscore something somebody recently said in another thread about how variance in signs (whether because of different local standards or because somebody made a mistake) is to be treasured because it's part of what keeps things interesting out there. What I find interesting is that it's not just roadgeeks who notice some of the variations. I recall when my parents and brother came down to Duke for a visit during my law school days we were driving to Chapel Hill and my father commented on a sign saying "REDUCE SPEED AHEAD" instead of the "REDUCED" wording that's standard in Virginia. But then, my mother was an English teacher and my father was also an English major, so they'd be more likely to notice such things.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on October 15, 2012, 08:23:30 PM
Quote from: Kacie Jane on September 20, 2012, 01:03:32 AM
One of my favorite drives I've ever taken was over White Pass, and I would never have had a reason to go there if I weren't clinching US 12 in the state and/or taking pictures for Wikipedia.
I'm totally necroing this thread, just to note that one can see a lot just by sticking to one numbered route which isn't a freeway. for example, US-6 is a great drive across the country... I wholeheartedly recommend such an activity to anyone who wants to see the world. Pick a number, and go.
as for missing out, really the one worst thing one can do is stay on the interstate, especially I-80 in Nebraska, which gives the entire Eisenhower system the stereotypical "connecting nothing to nowhere, really quickly" reputation. Just five miles away is US-30, which is infinitely more interesting.
But the speed limit on I-80 is 75 MPH. I prefer driving fast to slowing down to 25 MPH in town after town.
And that's the problem- people assume there's nothing to see in Nebraska so they make it a state they want to get through as quickly as possible.
You know what- I'm OK with it because Nebraska is one of the most underratedly scenic states in the country and there are basically zero tourists.
Quote from: bugo on October 19, 2012, 11:37:33 AM
But the speed limit on I-80 is 75 MPH. I prefer driving fast to slowing down to 25 MPH in town after town.
there is a lot worth slowing down for. old signs, random businesses, squirrels, etc.
I wouldn't go through the old towns if I were doing the road for the third or fourth time, but once or twice is very much worth it.
Quote from: 1995hoo on October 19, 2012, 10:45:05 AM
Quote from: cpzilliacus on October 19, 2012, 07:33:34 AM
Quote from: stridentweasel on October 18, 2012, 11:24:43 PM
This is one of the most illuminating points on this thread. I also feel compelled to add my own take on this (a month later)--
I think being roadgeeks allows us to see beauty in places and objects that others tend to find banal or ugly. What may be a horrific tangle of concrete and asphalt to some may be a masterwork of the applied arts to us. While an extensive array of green signs may be just background texture that slips from most commuters' everyday notice, to us it can be the drumbeat that gives continuity to and defines the rhythm of spatial/temporal creations that we consciously experience (consciously, because that is something we focus on). No piece of land or object on the landscape is inherently more or less worthy of anyone's attention. Beauty is something that only the individual observer can rightly take from something and give to himself or herself, and it follows that being roadgeeks is our gift to ourselves, just as nature lovers, train enthusiasts, bird watchers, or localized cuisine aficionados present such gifts to themselves.
That's probably why more than a few roadgeeks like the northern segments of the New Jersey Turnpike, even though Looking for America on the New Jersey Turnpike (http://www.amazon.com/Looking-America-New-Jersey-Turnpike/dp/0813519551) asserted that it is "so bad that it's good," making specific reference to the petroleum processing operations in Carteret and the general "look and feel" of Elizabeth (a large swath of which was condemned when the Turnpike was constructed) and past Newark Liberty International Airport.
....
A Car and Driver article once used the memorable description "miles and miles of universal fart" in referring to that area. I'll concur in that description because on one trip to New York, I rode with my brother and he insisted on keeping the windows down.....and then we got stuck in stopped traffic on the Goethals Bridge. I don't think I've come so close to puking from just a bad smell as I did that afternoon.
Worst smells on a highway?
In my experience,they are trucks hauling certain noxious-smelling cargoes. In particular, (1) trucks hauling dead animals to a rendering plant (e.g. Virginia's Valley Proteins); (2) trucks hauling grease from grease traps can be
bad (frequently same company that hauls dead animals, though in different vehicles); (3) animal livestock trucks, in particular those carrying hogs; and (4) truck carrying a load of crated chickens to the slaughterhouse.
Quote from: 1995hoo on October 19, 2012, 10:45:05 AM
I think your comments underscore something somebody recently said in another thread about how variance in signs (whether because of different local standards or because somebody made a mistake) is to be treasured because it's part of what keeps things interesting out there. What I find interesting is that it's not just roadgeeks who notice some of the variations. I recall when my parents and brother came down to Duke for a visit during my law school days we were driving to Chapel Hill and my father commented on a sign saying "REDUCE SPEED AHEAD" instead of the "REDUCED" wording that's standard in Virginia. But then, my mother was an English teacher and my father was also an English major, so they'd be more likely to notice such things.
The wording that always catches my attention (and annoys me) are the WATCH CHILDREN signs that some municipalities in Pennsylvania seem to like.
Quote from: cpzilliacus on October 19, 2012, 12:46:37 PM
The wording that always catches my attention (and annoys me) are the WATCH CHILDREN signs that some municipalities in Pennsylvania seem to like.
It's a shortened phrase to fit a point onto a sign.
"Watch your step" is very common with respect to stairs, but you could say that's an over-literal way to say that.
I see "watch your step" signs on the transit bus that I use, as well as "pise con cuidado", the Spanish phrase that means "tread carefully" in English. "Tread carefully" sounds odd if you are not familiar with it as well.
Quote from: bugo on October 19, 2012, 11:37:33 AM
Quote from: agentsteel53 on October 15, 2012, 08:23:30 PM
Quote from: Kacie Jane on September 20, 2012, 01:03:32 AM
One of my favorite drives I've ever taken was over White Pass, and I would never have had a reason to go there if I weren't clinching US 12 in the state and/or taking pictures for Wikipedia.
I'm totally necroing this thread, just to note that one can see a lot just by sticking to one numbered route which isn't a freeway. for example, US-6 is a great drive across the country... I wholeheartedly recommend such an activity to anyone who wants to see the world. Pick a number, and go.
as for missing out, really the one worst thing one can do is stay on the interstate, especially I-80 in Nebraska, which gives the entire Eisenhower system the stereotypical "connecting nothing to nowhere, really quickly" reputation. Just five miles away is US-30, which is infinitely more interesting.
But the speed limit on I-80 is 75 MPH. I prefer driving fast to slowing down to 25 MPH in town after town.
To me this underscores to some degree the difference between the travel to the destination and the travel around the destination. I suppose that sentence is unclear, but what I'm getting at is the notion of taking a vacation in a particular region where you don't maintain the same lodging the whole time. When my wife and I visit relatives in Florida, for example, we make stops in Venice, Fort Myers, Miami, and Viera, so I distinguish between the travel between Virginia and Florida (travel "to" or "from" the "destination") and the travel between locations in Florida (travel "around" the destination). For the travel around Florida I like to get off the Interstate (or the Turnpike) when feasible and see other things/take other roads, even if it means being slowed down a bit. But for the travel between Virginia and Florida I prefer to stay on the higher-speed roads to make time (assuming we're not on the Auto Train).
When I was a kid our family vacations were similar; for example, in August 1984 we took a trip that went up I-81 to the Thousand Islands, stopped for two days or so around there, then on to Montreal, stopped for two or three days, up to Quebec City, then to the Saguenay area, then back home via Magog and Vermont. My father usually took the Interstate for the trip to and from Canada but routinely avoided roads like 401 or the Quebec autoroutes when feasible because the travel around Quebec was part of seeing the province.
I do the same now, plus I tend to view it from the standpoint that I want to get to my destination in a relatively expeditious fashion with some level of exploring as long as it doesn't delay me too much or take me through speedtrap towns. Plus sometimes you have to be somewhere by a particular time and so you have to take the fast route–our last trip to Nova Scotia where we took the Cat Ferry from Portland being a great example, because it was imperative we be in Portland the night before for the early-morning departure.
So in general, seeing different roads is a part of the trip, but I do not allow it to become the trip itself.
I'd say my family roadtrips growing up were similar- we'd hustle from Idaho to the Oregon Coast, and then take US-101 down the coast, or go as fast as possible from Chicago down to North Carolina ,but then spend time driving around the Smokies, or drive to Ohio and then have like five different destinations within Ohio.
I'd say I do that too to a degree- once I've gone every reasonable route between two places once, I typically start taking the faster route exclusively. I never use anything but I-10 to get from here to Phoenix anymore, for instance. Or, if I were going to, say, Texas right now and were on a time crunch, I'd probably take I-10 past El Paso because seeing new things in Texas is more interesting than driving through Deming, NM on the backroad again.
Quote from: corco on October 19, 2012, 02:22:25 PM
I'd say I do that too to a degree- once I've gone every reasonable route between two places once, I typically start taking the faster route exclusively.
I do so typically, but not exclusively. there will be times when I drive up to the Bay Area and elect to take 101, instead of 5-580, even though I've done both dozens of times. (probably literally - I've done the trip between San Francisco and Los Angeles, in one direction or the other, at least 100-150 times.)
For me it varies because of variables like traffic and road construction and being utterly bored with routes I've driven hundreds or thousands of times. Between the DC area and New York, for example, the New Jersey Turnpike is under construction, there's often traffic in various places along I-95, etc., so I tend to go through Pennsylvania instead. It's a longer drive distance-wise, but it's not unusual for it to be faster time-wise (although I haven't made the trip since Delaware finished rebuilding the toll plaza). The one downside, I suppose, is that I know the I-95/Turnpike route so well that I always know exactly where I am and how far I have to go without even thinking about it, whereas I don't have that sense of familiarity with the Pennsylvania route.
But there are other trips where the alternate routes just aren't attractive. If I drive to Florida, it's almost a certainty that I'll wind up on I-95 between I-26 and Jacksonville. Going around by Atlanta is too far out of the way, and based on looking at a map it appears there aren't any good crossings from South Carolina to Georgia that don't require going through too many small towns other than a few fairly close to I-95 (and I've used some of those as bailout routes in traffic). So no matter how many times I make the trip, I know we're going to wind up on I-95 through there.
Quote from: corco on October 19, 2012, 11:39:56 AM
And that's the problem- people assume there's nothing to see in Nebraska so they make it a state they want to get through as quickly as possible.
You know what- I'm OK with it because Nebraska is one of the most underratedly scenic states in the country and there are basically zero tourists.
I love Nebraska. The Sand Hills, US 75 north of Omaha...and I haven't been west of US 183.
Quote from: bugo on October 19, 2012, 04:02:22 PM
Quote from: corco on October 19, 2012, 11:39:56 AM
And that's the problem- people assume there's nothing to see in Nebraska so they make it a state they want to get through as quickly as possible.
You know what- I'm OK with it because Nebraska is one of the most underratedly scenic states in the country and there are basically zero tourists.
I love Nebraska. The Sand Hills, US 75 north of Omaha...and I haven't been west of US 183.
Nebraska has some good scenery. I-80 scenery is quite a bit different from the two-laners. Lincoln's old town is a cool neighborhood. The area around Valentine has some good camping and canoeing opportunities.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on October 19, 2012, 10:09:30 AM
Quote from: NE2 on October 15, 2012, 09:30:44 PM
Quote"Besides," said the man, "there's no traffic passes through 6
I've always wondered about that quote. what did all the trucks take across northern Pennsylvania? no Turnpike in 1937... did they choose US-20 instead?
He was at the Bear Mountain Bridge, where 6 west is closed to trucks. For a longer distance, US 20 has significantly better grades. And don't forget NY 17.
Quote from: NE2 on October 19, 2012, 06:02:45 PM
He was at the Bear Mountain Bridge, where 6 west is closed to trucks. For a longer distance, US 20 has significantly better grades. And don't forget NY 17.
why so many trucks on US-6 in Pennsylvania to this day, then - even with the existence of US-20, NY-17/I-86, and a new corridor in I-80?
Who knows. Maybe there are fewer but it seems like more because it's two-lane.
http://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/freight_analysis/nat_freight_stats/nhsmajortrkrts2007.htm shows it to be the least-traveled of all the NHS routes there.
Quote from: NE2 on October 19, 2012, 06:23:02 PM
Who knows. Maybe there are fewer but it seems like more because it's two-lane.
http://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/freight_analysis/nat_freight_stats/nhsmajortrkrts2007.htm shows it to be the least-traveled of all the NHS routes there.
or I probably just thought "good grief" because I-80 and I-90 are right there, so why would anyone in their right mind take US-6? the reason I was taking it was because I had hoped no one else would.
Steve A. just loooooves US 6 in PA. :-D
Quote from: cpzilliacus on October 19, 2012, 07:33:34 AM
That's probably why more than a few roadgeeks like the northern segments of the New Jersey Turnpike, even though Looking for America on the New Jersey Turnpike (http://www.amazon.com/Looking-America-New-Jersey-Turnpike/dp/0813519551) asserted that it is "so bad that it's good," making specific reference to the petroleum processing operations in Carteret and the general "look and feel" of Elizabeth (a large swath of which was condemned when the Turnpike was constructed) and past Newark Liberty International Airport.
Another attraction of the New Jersey Turnpike is the great contrast in landscapes from south to north. There's not much in the way of hills and dales along the Turnpike, but the landscape of Salem County is about as extreme in its rural appearance as the industrialization that's present as the motorist drives further north.
The New Jersey Turnpike is actually my favorite road, but mostly for the design of the quad-carriageway configuration, where seemingly no expense was spared in building the ramps necessary to serve each carriageway at every interchange. I also agree that the scenery provides a unique sense of mood and contrast. I might pick up that book sometime.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on October 19, 2012, 02:49:18 PM
Quote from: corco on October 19, 2012, 02:22:25 PM
I'd say I do that too to a degree- once I've gone every reasonable route between two places once, I typically start taking the faster route exclusively.
I do so typically, but not exclusively. there will be times when I drive up to the Bay Area and elect to take 101, instead of 5-580, even though I've done both dozens of times. (probably literally - I've done the trip between San Francisco and Los Angeles, in one direction or the other, at least 100-150 times.)
Unless I'm really pressed for time, I'll almost always elect to take the more interesting/scenic route. For example, between Pittsburgh and Washington I'll get off the PA Turnpike in Somerset and take U.S. 219 down to I-68, maybe stop for a meal in Frostburg or Cumberland. Exponentially more enjoyable to me than having to go through the unholy abomination that is Breezewood and paying more on the Turnpike.
Likewise, I'll often take Ohio 32/U.S. 50/WV 2 to get from Cincinnati to Pittsburgh or vice versa, even though it's probably about 2 hours longer of a drive when you factor in things like being able to go 85 mph nearly the entire time on I-70, etc.
Quote from: bugo on October 19, 2012, 04:02:22 PM
Quote from: corco on October 19, 2012, 11:39:56 AM
And that's the problem- people assume there's nothing to see in Nebraska so they make it a state they want to get through as quickly as possible.
You know what- I'm OK with it because Nebraska is one of the most underratedly scenic states in the country and there are basically zero tourists.
I love Nebraska. The Sand Hills, US 75 north of Omaha...and I haven't been west of US 183.
It's interesting you mention having seen the Sandhills without having been west of US 183, because most of the Sandhills is west of US 183. Driving NE 2 from Grand Island to Alliance is a great way to experience the Sandhills.
Quote from: Beltway on October 19, 2012, 02:00:26 PM
I see "watch your step" signs on the transit bus that I use, as well as "pise con cuidado", the Spanish phrase that means "tread carefully" in English. "Tread carefully" sounds odd if you are not familiar with it as well.
Not
nearly as good as Mind the Gap (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mind_the_gap).
Quote from: cpzilliacus on October 25, 2012, 06:15:11 AM
Not nearly as good as Mind the Gap.
As if one might injure the gap while stepping over it.
Quote from: kphoger on October 19, 2012, 05:33:26 PM
Nebraska has some good scenery. I-80 scenery is quite a bit different from the two-laners. Lincoln's old town is a cool neighborhood. The area around Valentine has some good camping and canoeing opportunities.
True, I-80 is nestled down into the Platte River valley so you can see very little of Nebrasaka's scenery on the trip.
I really appreciate that Wisconsin intentionally added extra curves to some of their interstates so that drivers would have sweeping views of their scenery.
Quote from: flowmotion on November 10, 2012, 04:34:50 PM
I really appreciate that Wisconsin intentionally added extra curves to some of their interstates so that drivers would have sweeping views of their scenery.
Cite? I'm not saying I don't believe you, but I've never heard this.
Quote from: bugo on November 10, 2012, 08:32:21 PM
Cite? I'm not saying I don't believe you, but I've never heard this.
Sorry, it could just be an urban legend I picked up somewhere. Drive I-90/94 to see.
Quote from: flowmotion on November 13, 2012, 08:05:29 PM
Quote from: bugo on November 10, 2012, 08:32:21 PM
Cite? I'm not saying I don't believe you, but I've never heard this.
Sorry, it could just be an urban legend I picked up somewhere. Drive I-90/94 to see.
I've driven I-94 from the Illinois line to Tomah, and I-90 to the Minnesota border, and it didn't seem any curvier than any other freeway I've driven on with similar terrain features. However, much of the trip was very scenic, with the picturesque farms with the big red barns and the hills of western Wisconsin. I went into Wisconsin expecting nothing, and left it thinking it was one of the prettiest states that I've visited. And I barely got off the interstate.
Quote from: bugo on November 13, 2012, 10:26:14 PM
I've driven I-94 from the Illinois line to Tomah, and I-90 to the Minnesota border, and it didn't seem any curvier than any other freeway I've driven on with similar terrain features. However, much of the trip was very scenic, with the picturesque farms with the big red barns and the hills of western Wisconsin. I went into Wisconsin expecting nothing, and left it thinking it was one of the prettiest states that I've visited. And I barely got off the interstate.
Wisconsin is well worth getting off the interstate for!
(//www.aaroads.com/shields/blog/photos/062065.jpg)
Quote from: agentsteel53 on October 19, 2012, 11:41:53 AM
Quote from: bugo on October 19, 2012, 11:37:33 AM
But the speed limit on I-80 is 75 MPH. I prefer driving fast to slowing down to 25 MPH in town after town.
there is a lot worth slowing down for. old signs, random businesses, squirrels, etc.
I wouldn't go through the old towns if I were doing the road for the third or fourth time, but once or twice is very much worth it.
Our little pal thanks you for that (seen on our deck yesterday).
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi31.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fc378%2F1995hoo%2FBackie.jpg&hash=9e30102957d64b0ac42e17f9a4b4e7c4258c9b0a)
Quote from: 1995hoo on November 14, 2012, 10:39:45 AM
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi31.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fc378%2F1995hoo%2FBackie.jpg&hash=9e30102957d64b0ac42e17f9a4b4e7c4258c9b0a)
"Come at me, bro!"
Quote from: Special K on November 14, 2012, 11:34:02 AM
"Come at me, bro!"
:-D :-D :-D
He was actually looking for food. I had my phone in my left hand filming video and I was holding a peanut in my right hand. He wanted that peanut.
Squirrels are adorable. When I went up to Ann Arbor, my friend that lives up there was showing off how domesticated the ones on the University of Michigan campus had become. There is a particular arm gesture they respond to because they have been trained by the students, Pavlov-style, to think that means you have food. Apparently there is a student-run Squirrel Club that likes to feed them.
Someone on another forum I frequent decided to have some fun with my squirrel photo.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi258.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fhh247%2FTheTrueStein%2FylWxHCxrjEO2i8D3zQxIoQ2.jpg&hash=ca0570df143c8642a2e6f1e382ba8cddf537f964)
I was just thinking about some things and remembered this topic. I may be able to address the questions presented.
I'll start with my interests. My first field of intensive study was meteorology. I used my first car to go to Half Price Books in Arlington and buy a book on meteorology, written by a professor emeritus for the professional, by far the most difficult-to-read book I have, and most instructive. For that reason, it's one of the most valuable books I have.
My next field of intensive study was geomorphology, the study of landforms, and their origins and evolutions. Due to that study, I know the difference between a canyon and a hollow on a steep riverside, and the distinction between a hill and a mountain that has nothing to do with height.
Most things I did not study intensively for years, but studied slowly. Highways studies is in this group, although finding the Texas MUTCD and other publications online was one of my grand moments. Most things I've studied gradually, in particular the mind and people's thoughts. What I now see as my high aspiration is philosophy: it's the field that seems to include everything and tie together all the different fields of knowledge.
My belief is that each person represents a slice of reality; not all of it, but a piece. If you have strong interests, that seems to show that your purpose is to contribute to those interests. I'd say that you are missing out on most of life by focusing on an interest, but that the interests you have reflect the portion allotted to you. A "blurry/slanted/unhealthy view of the world" is what everyone has, varying based on how the view is blurry/slanted/unhealthy. While I respect the value of breadth, I believe in the importance of depth. I'd rather know the hell out of a few things than have an unusably shallow knowledge of everything. At the same time, if you find yourself asking whether there may be more, I'd suggest you spend some time looking. But if you have a happy and fulfilled life with your current fields of interest, I suggest there isn't much more you could hope for.
Quote from: wxfree on October 31, 2013, 03:24:29 AMI used my first car to go to Half Price Books in Arlington and buy a book on meteorology, written by a professor emeritus for the professional, by far the most difficult-to-read book I have, and most instructive. For that reason, it's one of the most valuable books I have.
Holton's "An Introduction to Dynamic Meteorology" by any chance? Or perhaps Bluestein's "Synoptic-Dynamic Meteorology in Midlatitudes"?
I'd like to think that being a roadgeek has helped me see the beauty of the road as well as the beauty beyond the road. I feel like most people are primarily focused on their destination and consider the other states as "drive through" places.
About six years ago, one of my close friends was attending her cousin's wedding in Akron, Ohio. I had not been to Ohio yet, and was excited for her. After she got back, I asked her about her trip, which route she took, etc. She said that she took the [PA] turnpike and that is was really boring. The drive was "all trees and hills" and she didn't think Akron was a noteworthy city.
A year later, I went out to Akron myself for a huge Todd Rundgren concert weekend. I was blown away by the beauty of the drive. I took I-80 there and the PA turnpike back. I was awe-inspired by the mountains, giddy about the tunnels, focused on the ribbons of pavement, dreamed about all of the places on the BGSs and wondered what they were like. When I got to Akron, i was amazed by the (practically deserted) inner loop, stoked by all of the button copy, surprised at how much the city reminded me of my own (Baltimore) in positive ways. I hung out with Todd fans that I knew from various parts of the country. Went along the riverside and checked out all of the dams. Ate at some local dives and people watched.
My friend and I saw different versions of the same thing. She would argue that Ohio and the drive there is boring while I would describe it as an epic crossroads across the Appalachian. Who is right? I'd like to think I experienced it more, and believe that my love of roads allowed me to do so.
Quote from: mefailenglish on November 04, 2013, 09:22:49 PM
Quote from: wxfree on October 31, 2013, 03:24:29 AMI used my first car to go to Half Price Books in Arlington and buy a book on meteorology, written by a professor emeritus for the professional, by far the most difficult-to-read book I have, and most instructive. For that reason, it's one of the most valuable books I have.
Holton's "An Introduction to Dynamic Meteorology" by any chance? Or perhaps Bluestein's "Synoptic-Dynamic Meteorology in Midlatitudes"?
No. Those are both very good books and valued parts of my collection, but my first book was Sverre Petterssen's
Weather Analysis and Forecasting. That book, published in 1940, and
Handbook of Meteorology, published in 1945, are the crown jewels of my collection. They were written before modern analysis and computers, and focused on understanding how the processes work.
Atmospheric Circulation Systems from 1969 rounds out the top three. I have an affinity for the older books because they use equations to illuminate understanding, while the newer books are more focused on the math, using equations as a different approach to understanding. The change is entirely valid due to the increased importance of math and the ability to run very large equations in computers, but I like being able to close my eyes and picture how it works more than using equations to calculate the correct outcome. My approach, while somewhat scientific, is rather romanticized; I have an appreciation for the beauty of the processes, which is distinct from the beauty of the equations.
I don't have a problem doing both. It's not like I'm obsessing over license plates and infrastructure, but I am making detailed observations of them as I do everything else.
A few years ago my family and I went up to Alaska. We were driving around and there were these trumpeter swans in a pond by the junction of AK 1/AK 9. So we get out to get a picture with me and the highway sign. I watch the scenery now and not just the signs (but those are interesting, too).
Quote from: flowmotion on November 10, 2012, 04:34:50 PM
Quote from: kphoger on October 19, 2012, 05:33:26 PM
Nebraska has some good scenery. I-80 scenery is quite a bit different from the two-laners. Lincoln's old town is a cool neighborhood. The area around Valentine has some good camping and canoeing opportunities.
True, I-80 is nestled down into the Platte River valley so you can see very little of Nebrasaka's scenery on the trip.
I really appreciate that Wisconsin intentionally added extra curves to some of their interstates so that drivers would have sweeping views of their scenery.
Yet, I feel I-80 in Nebraska gets underrated for scenery. Not all scenery is hills or barns. The Platte River valley is interesting IMHO from all the plants and wildlife along it. I-80 follows the south side of the river, the side away from the towns (which are mostly north of the river), thus I-80 goes through a wilder environment than if it were north of the river.
Quote from: cpzilliacus on October 19, 2012, 12:46:37 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on October 19, 2012, 10:45:05 AM
A Car and Driver article once used the memorable description "miles and miles of universal fart" in referring to that area. I'll concur in that description because on one trip to New York, I rode with my brother and he insisted on keeping the windows down.....and then we got stuck in stopped traffic on the Goethals Bridge. I don't think I've come so close to puking from just a bad smell as I did that afternoon.
Worst smells on a highway?
In my experience,they are trucks hauling certain noxious-smelling cargoes. In particular, (1) trucks hauling dead animals to a rendering plant (e.g. Virginia's Valley Proteins); (2) trucks hauling grease from grease traps can be bad (frequently same company that hauls dead animals, though in different vehicles); (3) animal livestock trucks, in particular those carrying hogs; and (4) truck carrying a load of crated chickens to the slaughterhouse.
Baltimore Harbor used to have that "rotten egg smell" due to various industrys' smokestacks, but in the last 20 years or so that seems to have been alleviated.
Northeast Philadelphia along I-95 a few miles north of Center City used to have a particularly unpleasant smell, again industrial related, like a mixture of glue and acid and several other unidentified smells, but in the last 20 years or so that seems to have been eliminated.