I left for work late in the first place, and then when I got to the corner, I realized that I had forgotten something upstairs, so I ran back and got it and realized that it was 7:44 by the time I was about to leave my apartment and that the next Metro-North came at 7:50. So, I figured that would be a better bet than regular transport. Since I live in a place where I have that option, I may as well take advantage of it, was my thinking.
I got to the Metro North station and got my ticket, the price of which having gone up during the latest round of extortionary price hikes, causing a peak time intracity journey to cost $7.50. That was my first indication that all was not as I would have hoped. One of the reasons that Metro North is a good bet, or so I thought, is that it runs on a schedule: it posts times at which it is supposed to come and get to where it is going. It is less likely to play the scheduling/connection games that make me crazy on the subway. If I am running late or something, I can plan my journey from a fixed time at Grand Central. I can look into the future and say, this is where I will definitely be at this definite time. That is worth a little bit of money and advanced planning as far as I’m concerned. However, as 7:50 passed by with no train on the horizon, my confidence was shaken. Then, as I watched 1 train after 1 train pass by the bridge just steps away, I imagined myself on it and did some quick calculations to determine what time I would get to work were I on that train – or that train – or that train.
The Metro North came at 7:55 (5 minutes late) and it was crowded so that I had to stand. Well, it isn’t like that all the seats were taken, but since some of the seats face each other at a distance of 1 foot, only two people can sit realistically in those clusters of 4 seats. The train itself ran at a pace unbefitting of a train, as far as I’m concerned. Again – I am fine with, when on the Metro North, taking for granted that I will get to where I am going at a certain time and taking any irregularities as a step along that process. For example, I know the train will run slowly as it enters Grand Central. It always does. But having it arrive 5 minutes late shook my confidence and made me feel a bit uncertain about its reasons for running slower than possible.
Since the train was so crowded, I was hoping that, perhaps, the ticket taker might not notice me and not take my ticket, thus giving me a free ride. But, no chance. He came by and took my ticket and started me thinking about the role of this ticket taker. I mean, with all the cuts that are happening, I am surprised that this person still exists. The ticket taker seems a relic from a different era when human error and interaction was not considered a nuisance. Installing turnstyles – like the type where you have to clock in and out of so that it can subtract the appropriate amount off your ticket (ala BART or DC Metro) – would seem to cost less. I’m surprised it hasn’t happened. In the meantime, we have this system where you have to interact with a human being, and a human being is called upon to utilize their powers of memory in order to perform his job correctly. The only way a ticket taker can accurately do his job is by remembering who was on the train, and noticing what is different since the last time he came through the car. It is nice to see that human beings in this industrialized world still have responsibility. But, why? Why the Metro North and not elsewhere? I mean, why have machines replaced so many human jobs, but no this human job that could have been replaced well before the most recent internet-based technological changes we’ve seen. I mean, on subways, humans are almost obsolete (machine based metrocard sales, machine based turnstyles, machine based announcements, machine based conductors in some cases), but on Metro North, ticket takers still patrol the cars. Don’t misunderstand me: I think it is great that people are being employed as ticket takers. I am just curious as to why there and not elsewhere. Why are human valued on the Metro North? My economic based theory is that installing turnstyles, etc. would require reconstruction of most of the stations in the system. My psychological based theory is that the Metro North travels mostly through wealthy suburbs and it is known that turnstyles and people in these areas would not react well to added layers of security.
In either case, the ticket taker is anachronistic and the process of paying for Metro North rides is wasteful of paper. You have to buy rides, as opposed to putting an amount of money on a card to simply be subtracted with each ride (considering that rides cost different amounts at different times of the day, this would seem to be the obvious way). And, extra paper is used to mark passengers whose tickets have been checked by the ticket taker (the ticket taker still has to use his memory, though, in the case that someone new is sitting in a seat of someone whose ticked had been checked). One technology they could employ would be to have a ticket validation system where the passenger is responsible for validating their own ticket via a machine that is on the train itself. The machine would know where the passenger got on the train, or would know at least what zone the passenger got on the train. The ticket taker would come through at the border of each zone to check that everyone’s ticket has been validated. This way, money can be subtracted from tickets rather than rides – and, the ticket taker would still be a valued member of society and the power of memory would be on display as an antidote to all of the outsourcing of memory that we have done.
In any event, it took me longer to get to work than it would have if I had taken the 1 train.
Monday, January 10, 2011
retro-north
Tuesday, January 4, 2011
it was just a misunderstanding
I was sitting there on the 1 train and it was rush hour and I had a lot of bags because I had just gone shopping for cat litter. I found a seat in the corner of the car, which was best for me because there I was most out of everyone’s way and they were most out of mine and less likely to step all over my bags or catch an attitude because the bags were in their way. It is a way of being considerate, I think. Of course, later on in the ride a beggar came through from between the cars and was carrying or pushing a walker, strangely enough, and he rolled over the corner of one of my bags – it was a paper bag – and tore it a bit but not much. Getting the walker through the doors unaided and keeping balance – as one who needs a walker, evidently – in between the moving cars, is an impressive feat of sorts.
Anyway, point was that I was sitting there minding my business and a man came on the train with his two daughters and they were all obviously not from New York by the way they dressed and the way the comported themselves on the train and the fact that they were so eager and vigilant about holding onto the poles when they walked on. Then, the father looked at an ad that was situated above my head, and laughed at it in a way that I thought was knowing, with a comment such as, “look at that message”. He pointed it out to his daughters who had no reaction. The ad was part of one of the MTA’s new series of ads and psa’s. There are line designs on the bottom of the page that are multicolored and meant to resemble the train lines on an old subway map. The content of the message was something to the effect that you should hold on while you multitask. The picture showed people holding onto the pole on a subway car with one hand while playing on a smartphone or some such device with the other.
The guy seemed eager to get a reaction about his noticing the ad, and I was as always eager to commiserate about the indignity of paternalistic MTA psa’s. “I guess we are all children in their eyes.” I said. He considered the comment and said, “Yeah, it’s important. I’ve seen people stumbling around trying to play on their phones.” Oh, I thought, he misunderstood me and thought that I was happy that we are children in their eyes. “Hmph. That’s the new increased subway fare put to work – those ads, I mean.” I meant to clarify that what I was against was the nature of the ad itself, not the nature of the behavior of the subway riders portrayed in the ad. There was no response; only a smile. He got off at the next stop. He was a tourist and didn’t care about the fare hike. It was just a misunderstanding.
Friday, December 31, 2010
could be worse?
The last trips I had taken were to the following places: Holland, where the entire country is serviced by a network of ultra-efficient, timely, and comfortable trains that zip you from city to city in a matter of minutes. Of course, the country is not very big, so a trip from Maastricht to Amsterdam – basically from the west to the east of the country – is only a 2 hour journey. In the main city of Amsterdam, enough trolleys are running so as to scare unwitting pedestrians, and there is also a metro system. Transportation is not an issue and you are crazy to own a car. Ecuador, where what they lack in a train system is made up for in a bus system that will take you as quickly as possible (given the shape and condition of the roads) to any corner of the country accessible by road, from any other corner of the country. And, if these busses run even a couple of minutes late for, for example, waiting at a station hoping for more passengers, the populace on the bus begin to get rowdy, demanding that the bus leave at its scheduled time, not passively submitting to the authority of the bus company and assuming that their negligent practices are in service of a higher, unknowable cause. In the cities, the busses run everywhere from large avenues, to tiny cobbled streets. While it would be nice if the emissions standards were better (pedestrians inhale, routinely, the equivalent of 20 cigarettes worth of exhaust from passing busses), the service itself is constant and damn-near door to door, as you can ask the bus to drop you off wherever you want, and you can pretty much pick it up wherever you want too. And, Sweden, where the train from the airport to the center of Stockholm whizzes you at an incredible 130 miles per hour, making a 45 or so mile journey into a 20 minute joy-ride. This train is so efficient that it has only been reported off schedule 3 times in its entire existence. The city itself has a network of trolleys and subways that are clean, friendly, timely, and that will not be thrown off schedule for anything (a sublime subway moment happened in Stockholm as Anna and I were rushing to catch a bus. We were on one of the green lines and needed to get onto one of the red lines in order to get to the bus stop. The two lines run parallel for three or so stations in the center of the city. As we entered that zone, at the first shared station, the red line closed its door and left as we pulled into the station. The next red line train was not to arrive for another 6 minutes, which was too long for us to wait – we were really pushing it with time in terms of catching the bus. Our thought was that if we stay on the green line, perhaps we would catch up to the red train, or that the red train would wait an extra second or two for us at one of the other shared stations. No luck! At each of the three shared stations, there was a repeat performance of watching the doors close and the red train pull out of the station just as we pulled in. This required a devotion to efficiency on behalf of the system, and a respect for other people’s time on behalf of the citizenry, who did not suppose that their own personal dramas were worth inconveniencing an entire train’s worth of people by holding doors open or other such nonsense. As for us, we had to get out and take a cab in order to get to our bus on time, but everyone who remained on the trains had a smooth, incident-free commute. It’s a fair trade, and it serves us right for getting a late start (for all the talk of our having a society of individuals (which is an oxymoronic concept), the result is that when everyone acts in their own individual benefit (like holding doors open on the subway to make up for lost time – a necessity created by the individual’s negligence in leaving their house late), the society loses out, and while a “socialist” country like Sweden might not value individuality in such a way that it would be acceptable for a person to hold the doors of a train, individual responsibility comes to mean acting in a way that is beneficial to all and not just selfishly, which is ultimately more dignified (a person is not dignified when they are holding the doors of a train open))). So, in embarking on our most recent trip to San Francisco, I was more than prepared to come back with a report of yet another place in the world with better system and practices. I was especially ready to file this report upon the first leg of our journey, which was a long A train ride from 207th street to JFK. A long ride made even longer by the fact that the train was running local because it was nighttime. Why? Why can’t the C run at night? The whole reason the A runs express in the first place is that it runs an absurdly long route – one that takes about 2 hours under the best circumstances. Does that change at night? Does a person traveling from 207th to Far Rockaway not deserve a means of transport that gets him home in less than 2 hours because it is night?
Anyway, I was wrong.
San Francisco has two train services – the BART and the MUNI, which are mutually exclusive companies. You cannot use BART tickets on MUNI and vice versa. In that way, they are like the Metro-North/LIRR and the NYC subway service. MUNI trains and busses, however, share ticketing. There is also the old-fashioned cable car, which is a totally different story. However, San Fancisco is not directly equitable to New York, so the fact that the relationship between BART and MUNI is similar to the Metro North and subways does not mean it is 1:1. For example, Metro North is mainly a commuter train. Yes, there are specific points in the city from which you might opt to take Metro North rather than the subway. My apartment comes to mind. I happen to live directly next to a Metro-North station. And, I happen to live in an area of the city from which it is very difficult to take subways to, say, the east side of Manhattan. Those two factors together make it so that if I have to go to the east side of Manhattan, I will most likely take Metro North – especially if it is the weekend and I can get the $3.50 fare. However, if I had to go out of my way to get Metro North, I probably would not take it within the city. And, for example, if I lived on 125th and Lexington, where there is a subway and a Metro-North stop, and I needed to get to 42nd street, where there is also a subway and Metro North stop, I would never ever take the Metro North for that trip. It would not be worth the extra money. The subway can take me that route for half the price. Yes, I would be sacrificing comfort and speed, but still, it would not be worth it. In San Francisco, BART actually competes with MUNI for destinations within the city itself. If you are at Powell street and needed to go to the Mission, then it wouldn’t make sense to take the MUNI. It is more expensive and slower. BART prices vary by distance, and within San Francisco, it is pretty cheap. It gets more expensive if you want to go to Oakland or Berkeley, or the airport, or any other surrounding-area type place. But, MUNI does not compete with BART for these destinations. Anyway, point being, you might live in New York City and never ever take Metro North, but if you live in San Francisco, you probably take BART; and MUNI.
The BART is short and squat and shaped like a giant isosceles triangle. I am just about taller than BART is. When BART enters the station it makes a noise like a screaming ghost. BART has upholstered, soft seating and wall to wall carpeting: I hope San Francisco does not have bedbugs. There is dedicated space for bikes on BART and the straphangers on BART actually hang on to leather straps. On the BART platforms, the rubber portion that tells you that you are too close to the edge, are painted both yellow and black. The black sections are where the doors open. This may seem convenient: In New York, for example, knowing where the doors open is a matter of experience, research, and luck. However, the black spots just mean that everyone crowds the black spots on the platforms and jockeys for a space in the black spot and winds up standing directly in front of the doors as they open, making it a bit of a mess for people getting out of the train. Getting out of the train station itself is a pain. Since fares increase with distance, and there are no ticket takers coming through the train as there are on Metro North (and on Stockholm’s trolleys), tickets must be entered into a turnstyle upon entering and exiting stations. There are not enough turnstyles. Lines form at each exiting turnstyle. Even if there were initially enough turnstyles, they are not equally distributed between entering and exiting. There are more turnstyles for getting in than for getting out. There may be only 2 exit turnstyles at a major station. To compound it, going through the turnstyles is not a simple act of walking through: you have to put your ticket in the machine and take it out of the machine before you can go through. People get this wrong and take even more time. One station had only its down escalator working, further servicing the entering passengers to the detriment of the exiting. Purchasing tickets is a pain. There are ticket booths that accept cash, and machines that accept cards. On the machines, though there is a keypad, there is no option for punching in the exact amount of money you would like to put on the card. The machine automatically assumes you want to put $20 on the card, and gives you the option to either increase or decrease that amount by $1 or by $.05. So, in order to buy a card worth $8.60 (the amount that will get you from the airport to Powell street), rather than touching 3 buttons (an “8”, a “6”, and a “0”), you have to touch 20 buttons to get the price to $8.60 from the default of $20. This is absurd. The BART is often held at stations for undisclosed reasons. There is only 1 BART track that runs through the entire city of San Francisco, and through most of Oakland too. There are 5 BART lines. By comparison, Metro North converges all 3 of its East-of-Hudson lines onto one track at 125th street, making it that all trains run on the same track for only 1 stop. Some BART lines run as few as 5 stops independent of other lines. This is not many.
The MUNI runs busses and 3-car trolleys throughout the city. These trolleys go underground at times too. The busses are largely electric, meaning that they produce zero emissions and that they run attached to electrical wires above, with two long poles attaching the bus to the wires sticking out of the bus’ roof. Tickets for the trolley are $2 and you pay money into a machine as you walk onto the train. The conductor then gives you a flimsy piece of paper, ripped off at a certain spot that indicates a time until which you can ride any line. This time is usually 2 hours in the future. This is a marvelous waste of time and a burden on the train conductor who has to drive the train AND rip pieces of paper. Tickets should automatically eminate from the machine into which you put money. There is also the option to buy a multi-day pass and simply scan it as you walk on. Trolleys, when running outside, are subject to traffic lights. When running inside, the all run on one track – and this happens throughout the entire area of downtown San Francisco. There are many lines and the convergence onto one track slows service.
The A train ran express when we arrived back into NYC.
Saturday, December 25, 2010
subject to search
On the 1 train, there is no computerized voice telling you what stop you are at and what stop is next. It is only a matter of time, of course. But, for now, a human being makes the announcements over the loudspeaker and there are times when they even forget to tell us what stop is next. This does not happen often, but I’ve seen it happen. I’ve also seen it happen that they announce the wrong stop, or stumble over their words, etc. While I am not here to make an ascetic point or anything like that, I must admit that the element of human error has its nostalgic allure. And, while I am not here to make an ascetic point, I am most definitely here to make a point about how gross non-asceticism can be at times.
For example, with the computerized 6 train, or L train, for example, it can be understood that if it were a company rule that a certain amount of messages of the post-9/11 variety must be given (and these can be defined by their dehumanizing nature, encouraging passengers to think of one another as potential terrorists or otherwise untrustworthy beings in need of guidance from a computerized voice), that the computerized voice could be programmed to deliver those messages. However, on the 1 train, with all of its human foibles, to hear a real live man’s voice state that “packages and other large containers are subject to random search by the police” without any knowing wink or nod to the fact that he is being forced to deliver this message under threat of unemployment can be a bit jarring. In fact, on one particular train, the conductor making the announcement did a particularly effort-laden job to make his voice sound sort of like Barry White’s. His voice sounded like that when he was announcing what station we were that and it just continued on sounding like that as he gave the terrorism-related message. Whatever was charming in his delivery until that point was ruined by the message. His funny-in-how-smooth-it-was voice took on a sinister edge as far as I was concerned, and after he gave the message, the voice grated my eardrums as it annouced stop after stop.
Now, I am sure that he did not give that message spontaneously. those were not his words and he is just doing what needs to be done to keep his job etc. I am not particularly mad at him.
I remember when those types of messages first started infiltrating the MTA. The premise, of course, was that anyone could be a terrorist and that the best way to combat terrorism was to remain vigilant at all times and notice when terrorists (who are among us all the time) were about to terrorize and then pounce on them. Basically do what the people did on the 9/11 plane in Pennsylvania. Everyone is given the opportunity to live out their greatest (adventure) movie fantasy and save the day for America. And as far as the bag inspection is concerned, well, clearly having our bags randomly checked by police as we enter the train station would deter terrorists because... well, its proactive. We are taking the fight to them, etc. and if a few regular citizens have to be violated in the process, then so be it - it’s for the greater good, bla bla. When those messages first started coming out, I remember wondering how they were ever goign to be phased out. What would have to happen in order to return to the days before having my commute interrupted by messages about how I was under surveillance or could be? I knew it at the time, and I know it now: the only thing that is going to reverse that is organized action. The problem is that the purveyors of paranoia have been building off of their achievements, developing entire lifestyles out of delivering messages of doom. It is for this reason that hearing a real live person deliver the message is that much more jarring - a computerized voice cannot communicate a communal feeling, and if a live voice cannot either, then the extent of isolation that has occurred is daunting. if the messages are delivered in earnest, then hope wanes. Looking around as the message comes through the speaker, people (other passangers) are to be seen with headphones in, or staring at screens, or just trying really really hard to mind their own business. Not a knowing pair of eyes lifted. It is a major part of the ethos of a New Yorker to be able to exist in solitude amongst many.