Guys, I live in LA. Crazy.
This also means that it's finally time to write this post that I have been sitting on for quite some time...
One of my favorite learning techniques is to use metaphors or comparisons of things I'm familiar with to get a grasp on something new. This worked great for my students (I think...) and was also successful in helping me master the rules of rugby when I was in Australia. Using football as as staring point, I was able to make connections and understand a new game... and meet cute Aussie boys ;)
Anyways, as you may have gleaned, this post is going to make a comparison. In order to orientate and get my lay of the land out here, I'm going to equate the areas of LA to their Chicago neighborhood equivalents. I'm also gonna go ahead and say which area I prefer though the total is not generalize-able to an overall LA v Chicago throwdown, they are just entirely too different.
***Disclaimer*** The comparisons are based purely on my impressions and biases after living here for approximately three months. What I have to say about Chicago is most likely true, but I may have some misconceptions or over-generalizations about LA. Also, being that I am a fairly open minded person, these impressions are subject to change as I continue to assimilate in the area. For now, I present you with... (Drum roll please)....
The Chicagoan's Guide to LA
Beverly Hills: The LA version of Chicago's Gold Coast
High end shopping, expensive homes, celebrity sightings, loads of tourists. This comparison is a no brainer. I can't really think of anything else to say about these places... they speak for themselves...
Winner: I find the Gold Coast less intimidating... but this is pretty much a wash
Venice: The LA version of Chicago's Wrigleyville
This comparison is far from perfect. Wrigleyville is the home of the former frat boy and Venice is hippie wonderland. Wrigleyville is centered around the historic ballpark of my favorite sports team (Wrigley Field) and Venice has a weird fenced in area for dudes to lift weights (Muscle Beach). However- I'm going to say that the Venice Boardwalk and Clark St. have the same spirit (especially on a game day). Loads of people milling around, weird men selling stuff on the street, bars and restaurants packed together; basically, the area you live if you aren't quite ready to grow up yet. (No judgement. Seriously, I lived in Wrigleyville and almost lived in Venice. I'm actually only about 6ish blocks from Venice...)
Winner: Venice- transport the boardwalk to the Santa Monica Promenade and you have Pearl St in Boulder. *Swoon* And the beach is prettier than The Friendly Confines (I think I just died inside while typing that, but it's the truth...)
Santa Monica: The LA version of Chicago's Lincoln Park
A fancy, somewhat uppity area where family friendly meets young professionals who are still wanting to live in an area with a social scene. More laid back then the super high end areas. Good bars and restaurants lacking the intense density of the former regions, but still prevalent none the less. Both encompass popular beach areas, Santa Monica lacks a zoo but has a better beach area. Both have Farmer's Markets though Santa Monica's seems to be more organized and operates year round.
Winner: Ugggghhh... Santa Monica. Better beach, better farmer's market. The zoo almost killed it though...
Silver Lake: The LA version of Chicago's Wicker Park
Hipsters.
Winner: Wash. They are the same place.
The Area Around USC: The LA version of Chicago's Hyde Park
Ok, this is by far my biggest speculation as I don't even know what the area around USC is called (It's by Leimert Park, I don't think it's actually in Leimert Park. It is on that map...somewhere...right of Leirmet Park...ish?). I've heard that it's a nice school in the middle of a ghetto area- which is also how one would describe University of Chicago. I'll be able to elaborate more on this conjecture next fall when I watch my Buffaloes play at the Coliseum. (I really see no reason to go over there before that).
Winner: Um... I dunno. I guess Hyde Park since I've been there?
Compton/Watts: The LA version of Chicago's West Side
Ahh yes, the areas inundated with gangs and violence. And the one comparison I'm making in which I have greater knowledge of the LA area than the Chicago area. I have spent approximately zero time on the West Side of Chicago, but I watch the news and that is enough. Oh, and I drove through the north side of Humboldt Park once, quickly. I did however, spend about 5 weeks in Watts learning how to Teach For America. My experience in Watts could be a whole other post so I'll save it and just say that I actually have some pretty fond memories and that my only experience with gang members was kicking them out of my classroom for violating dress code. Oh! And there may or may not have been an ice cream truck dealing drugs...never quite figured that one out...
Winner: Compton/Watts... keep it rockin'
Pasadena: The LA version of Chicago's Evanston
The wealthy area outside of proper city limits. Big, old houses. Both have a college football stadium, though comparing The Rose Bowl to Ryan Field (where Northwestern plays) is laughable. Also, it's MUCH easier to get to Evanston from the city than to get out to Pasadena from LA. Snaps for the El who lacks an LA counterpart (the metro does not count, that is a half-ass attempt at public transit).Winner: Evanston- I have an extreme value for public transportation. Clearly. The Rose Bowl is obviously better than Ryan Field and once a year you have the Rose Parade! But the traffic and parking nightmare that ensues... no thank you.
While this is by no means comprehensive, I think this is a good representation of both areas, at least from what I have seen of LA. It will be interesting to see if my feelings change at all during my residency in California. For now, I stand by my assessments.
Wonderful post! Except, Watts/Compton is probably like Chicago's South Side.
ReplyDeleteThe South Side has actually cleaned up a lot in recent years. Humboldt Park is the highest crime area in Chicago. But yeah, traditionally the South Side was the roughest.
ReplyDeleteyou were close, except for the "nice school" part ;)
ReplyDeleteYou know by "nice" I meant "expensive school for rich kids" right?
ReplyDelete