AUSTIN | Misc. Discussions - No Politics

[Tech House]

I appreciate the POV of that article because it made it very easy for me to see the flaw of my own attitude about cultural amenities such as museums. I've tended to view them as a necessary benefit for cities to be taken seriously culturally. But Austin pretty much sucks for museums, and rocks the festival scene, so maybe it's best to play to our strengths rather than trying to force ourselves to fit a mold that we're not suited for.

COTA seems like it has been a fairly justifiable risk, not so much for the city and state but for those who selected Austin as the place to expand F1 back into the States. It might be a decade or two ahead of its time. Austin is on a pretty unimpeded trajectory toward being a global destination and one of the world's great cities for the coming century, but we're still a work in progress. I don't know if COTA would ever be self-sustaining here, but I can see why some people would have guessed it would be.

One of the smart aspects of COTA is to continue developing it as a multi-event facility, rather than focusing and relying too much on F1 for its success.

Novacek, I don't recall where I read this but the notion of festival gluts has been noted and explored, and it's a real problem in many cases. The article cited 4 new major festivals just in Idaho, along with several in various out-of-the-way Midwestern locations. I don't think Austin's at risk of having too many, however.

[drummer]

I see *some* museums as important to the preservation of a culture's and society's identity, history, etc. I don't think we need a museum for every version of the iPhone or some other trinket-type museum (my opinion, clearly). There are very important things that museums do for people and especially for schools, colleges, etc. They're also interesting, but not all of them are necessary or productive. Others, again in my opinion, are more points of interest rather than archives of history.

[the Genral]

[QUOTE=Tech House;7443713]I appreciate the POV of that article because it made it very easy for me to see the flaw of my own attitude about cultural amenities such as museums. I've tended to view them as a necessary benefit for cities to be taken seriously culturally. But Austin pretty much sucks for museums, and rocks the festival scene, so maybe it's best to play to our strengths rather than trying to force ourselves to fit a mold that we're not suited for.

I agree. Washington DC by comparison is a museum town but would suck for festivals. I think I hit them all when I was there, but that's what I meant to do when I planned my trip.
Chicago has a big museum and a decent planetarium. They weren't on my itinerary, but because the weather always seemed to be nasty every time I went, the inside activities were convenient. I don't imagine people would come to Austin for the museums, and the only way to be sustainably by locals is if you build a large world class structure that can bring in prestigious loaner exhibits to warrant frequent return visits by the locals. And even then interest would probably fade in a few years. Of course who knows for sure...Austin Aquarium is still open, and its less than.....stellar. Heck, I 've never even been to the Bob Bullock Museum. It never seemed that interesting to me. Has anyone here ever been?

[drummer]

I went to the Bullock years ago and it was done pretty well. I remember doing the LBJ Library on field trips back in elementary school...haven't been in years. The Capitol also has a small museum on the grounds that is well done.

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by Tech House

COTA seems like it has been a fairly justifiable risk, not so much for the city and state but for those who selected Austin as the place to expand F1 back into the States.

? For the city and the state it's been all-upside, no downside.

[urbancore]

Originally Posted by Novacek

If he thinks museums are money losers, just wait until every city in America tries to start a music festival. The dilution of the audiences and the talent level alone would guarantee failure for 99%.

agreed.

[austlar1]

I had dinner Sunday night at Fixe at 500 W 5th St. I was actually a bit confused and disoriented when I came out of the restaurant after dinner and tried to get my bearings. There were so many new buildings visible at that location that I was not sure what I was looking at. No, I did not drink wine or any other booze at dinner. Anyway, it felt like I was in a strange city there for a minute, but it all looked very impressive. By the way, the food at Fixe is only so-so. It was served mostly at room temperature (not by design, I am sure) and was kind of disgusting for that reason. One Hundred bucks for two people with no booze. I won't be back anytime soon.

[jbssfelix]

Originally Posted by austlar1

I had dinner Sunday night at Fixe at 500 W 5th St. I was actually a bit confused and disoriented when I came out of the restaurant after dinner and tried to get my bearings. There were so many new buildings visible at that location that I was not sure what I was looking at. No, I did not drink wine or any other booze at dinner. Anyway, it felt like I was in a strange city there for a minute, but it all looked very impressive. By the way, the food at Fixe is only so-so. It was served mostly at room temperature (not by design, I am sure) and was kind of disgusting for that reason. One Hundred bucks for two people with no booze. I won't be back anytime soon.

It was the biscuits...pretty sure they're laced with cocaine or something. mmmmmmmmm..

[the Genral]

Just reading the AAS today got me pondering a couple of things about Austin and an interesting Water Cooler edition.
First, in the article about the Washington DC shooting yesterday, two witnesses were interviewed, one from "Austin, Texas", the other from "Detroit". Maybe we discussed this before, but Austin has never been more reknowned than today, and still, for as far back as I remember, you almost never hear or read a mention of Austin without being followed by Texas. Detroit wasn't follow by Michigan in that story. There are 10 Austins and 6 Detroits in the US. Could have been any of the other Detroits, but the Assiciated Press chose to make sure that the person from Austin was the one in TX and we have to guess which of the other 6 states the other Detroitian hailed from. So I'm curious why all the other major cities can almost always be mentioned without their state, yet you almost never see or hear Austin mentioned without Texas.
In another article / viewpoint vlog, the writer asks, "Why doesn't Austin feel like a big city"? This perplexes me too. With 900k plus, you would expect a city to look the part. I can't put my finger on why, but given its designation as the 11th largest, I still can't call Austin a big city, especially compared to other "less" populated cities such as San Francesco, which looks like a very big city to me.
Finally, today's Water Cooler segmant was about the report regarding the proposed West Fourth and Colorado. They published 9 comments...
1 liked the design...2 others may or may not have, but took issue with lack of mass transit creating the need for excessive parking, 1 just mentioned her fear of Austin losing its vibe with all the new construction going on, the other 5 had negative opinions on the design. My favorite comment coming from a guy who moved from Austin to Portland where he believes the city of Portland is doing more to protect the skyline and identity of the city.

[austlar1]

Deleted- too preachy and likely to piss somebody off.

[jbssfelix]

Originally Posted by the Genral

Just reading the AAS today got me pondering a couple of things about Austin and an interesting Water Cooler edition.
First, in the article about the Washington DC shooting yesterday, two witnesses were interviewed, one from "Austin, Texas", the other from "Detroit". Maybe we discussed this before, but Austin has never been more reknowned than today, and still, for as far back as I remember, you almost never hear or read a mention of Austin without being followed by Texas. Detroit wasn't follow by Michigan in that story. There are 10 Austins and 6 Detroits in the US. Could have been any of the other Detroits, but the Assiciated Press chose to make sure that the person from Austin was the one in TX and we have to guess which of the other 6 states the other Detroitian hailed from. So I'm curious why all the other major cities can almost always be mentioned without their state, yet you almost never see or hear Austin mentioned without Texas.
In another article / viewpoint vlog, the writer asks, "Why doesn't Austin feel like a big city"? This perplexes me too. With 900k plus, you would expect a city to look the part. I can't put my finger on why, but given its designation as the 11th largest, I still can't call Austin a big city, especially compared to other "less" populated cities such as San Francesco, which looks like a very big city to me.
Finally, today's Water Cooler segmant was about the report regarding the proposed West Fourth and Colorado. They published 9 comments...
1 liked the design...2 others may or may not have, but took issue with lack of mass transit creating the need for excessive parking, 1 just mentioned her fear of Austin losing its vibe with all the new construction going on, the other 5 had negative opinions on the design. My favorite comment coming from a guy who moved from Austin to Portland where he believes the city of Portland is doing more to protect the skyline and identity of the city.

Not sure about the article, but at least for me when I verbally state where I'm from, I say "Austin TX" just because Austin could sound like Boston or Lawson or whatever. I used to live in Indianapolis, and it was the same scenario with people thinking I said Minneapolis.

[drummer]

I always say Austin, Texas. I'm not sure why...never really thought about it. Actually, I usually say 奥斯汀 ("Àosītīng") and people know it so long as they know I'm talking about 德克萨斯州 ("Dékèsàsīzhōu")...so I guess that's the same as saying Austin, Texas...

[lzppjb]

If it's someone from Texas asking, I say South Austin.

If it's someone outside Texas, I say Austin, Texas.

[hookem]

I grew accostumed to saying Austin, Texas when out of state/country because half the time when I just said "Austin" people would hear Boston. Even though no "B" sound was ever uttered....

[We vs us]

Is it possible the "Austin, Texas" is how the Austin City Limits the TV show used to be introduced? I feel like it's possibly part of an announcer's spiel: "Live, from Austin, Texas!"

[Novacek]

This has come up before on wikipedia, and they reference the AP style guidelines. That calls for city, state except for 30 cities.

https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/735/02/
(that's the first list I found by googling, there's probably a better reference)

I'm not sure what criteria the AP used when creating that list, and if they revisit it as cities grow.

[AusTxDevelopment]

When visiting England a couple of years ago, a cabbie asked us where we were from. We said Texas. He laughed and said most yanks say America or the US, except people from Texas. Texans always say Texas.

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by Novacek

This has come up before on wikipedia, and they reference the AP style guidelines. That calls for city, state except for 30 cities.

https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/735/02/
(that's the first list I found by googling, there's probably a better reference)

I'm not sure what criteria the AP used when creating that list, and if they revisit it as cities grow.

Seems like the other cities that can complain include

Riverside, CA (13th largest metro)
Tampa, FL (18th largest metro)
Charlotte, NC (22nd largest metro)
Portland, OR
Sacramento, CA
Kansas City

or if you're looking at just city population
San Jose (bigger than Austin)
Jacksonville
Fort Worth
etc.

[Jdawgboy]

I just say Austin without Texas because it kinda irks me as well about having to hear Texas added like we are so unkown that they have to be reminded we are the 2nd largest state capital city of the second largest state both in size and population.

I actually have started to see and hear Austin mentioned more without Texas. I figured in time now that the city does get a lot of national and international attention that it will become less of a need to add Texas. To be fair though I have heard the other 3 largest cities have Texas added after their names occasionally as well.

[the Genral]

Originally Posted by Novacek

This has come up before on wikipedia, and they reference the AP style guidelines. That calls for city, state except for 30 cities.

https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/735/02/
(that's the first list I found by googling, there's probably a better reference)

I'm not sure what criteria the AP used when creating that list, and if they revisit it as cities grow.

That's pretty interesting Novacek. Thanks for finding and posting that.