Subways

My friend Dave recently commented on driving, saying that he prefers to simply sit on a train, but he lives out on Long Island – the suburbs – which makes driving necessary, and would not like to live anywhere so densely populated as to make public transportation so practical or effective.  In other words, in a big city such as New York City just miles west of where he lives.  This reminded me of my own time living in cities where I could get by using subways instead of cars.

 I’ve lived in Paris for some time and spent time in NYC – and of US subway systems I’m most familiar with DC’s.  From September 1998 to April 1999, and then again from January 2000 to November 2000, I worked on L Street in DC and took the Metro to work every day.  Here are my comments on this subject.

 Washington DC.  DC’s subway system is fairly recent (it was begun in the late 70s) and the stations are few and far between; the closest station to Georgetown is 10 blocks southwest at GWU.  They are all practically identical, with very dark, concrete interiors.  I don’t know who designed them, but they really strike me as dull, utilitarian, and even totalitarian, which is ironic in the capital city of the world’s premier capitalist democracy.  Of course there are ads, but the overpowering darkness of the stations is oppressive.  The trains, however, are very well-lit, which is a strong contrast.  The large distances between even city stops (the suburban stops are light years distant from each other) makes them more appropriate for “out of the city to some interior location, and back” travel.  Since driving in DC is such a pain in the ass, the optimum deal would be to park at a Metro station in the suburbs – if you could find a space – and take the Metro in.   I found out the hard way that doesn’t work well when going to concerts; I had to walk all the way home from the (new) 9:30 Club when I came out of a Monster Magnet concert only to find the metro closed.  When I worked at L Street I would take the Metro from Rosslyn to McPherson Square, which is right in the heart of the K Street business district.  On the DC Metro you have to buy tickets according to the distance, and peak vs. non-peak travel time, but at least the card acts as a de facto debit card for the system itself.

 New York City.  NY’s subway is famous, and runs 24/7.  The stops are fairly close together and numerous enough.   Although most still have some ancient tile on the curved walls, with the overall impression being from the early 20^th century even today, there is a remarkable variance in design to them which DC conspicuously lacks.   I remember traveling on the subway with my family in the 70s, back when the subway cars went dark and were covered in graffiti.  Fortunately we were never mugged.

 Boston.  I went on Boston’s subway only briefly in 1987 when I visited my buddy John at Boston University.  Boston’s subway seemed to have real trains going through tunnels.  It looked like the platforms were too low relative to the trains.

 Paris.  By far, this is the system I’m most familiar with and like the most.  The stations were very close together and carpeted the city – you were never more than a few blocks from any stop.  They had a wide variety of designs, with the Louvre stop the most elaborate.  To this day, I can remember the Pont de Neuilly – Vincennes line stops.  Most lines ran older trains, I recall the Balard-Creteil line ran newer ones which were much cooler.  In addition to the RATP (Metro) Paris has the RER (Reseau Expres Regional – Regional Express Network) which comes in from WAYYYY out of town.  I haven’t been to Paris since 1990, though I understand they’ve extended the Pont de Neuilly line out to La Defense.  The Paris Metro dates from the turn of the century and has some very beautiful art nouveau subway entrances.  I recall it as being fairly clean (except for sanitation strikes) and had its share of buskers and street musicians (which I also recall from NYC).  Unlike Washington DC and London, Paris uses generic yellow tickets good for a journey of any distance, though the Carte Orange (orange card) good for unlimited monthly travel on all forms of Parisian public transportation was the best value.  Unfortunately the Paris Metro was not open 24/7.  One New Year’s morning I had to walk back from St Paul-Le Marais all the way to Malesherbes at 5 in the morning. 

 London.  The Underground is, of course, the world’s oldest and very famous.  The stations were close enough together and went to the most important parts of town (e.g. Picadilly Circus and Oxford Street, for us).  The exits are labeled “WAY OUT”.  I haven’t been to London since 1985, so it may have changed since then.  You paid by distance, which I don’t like.   The Underground did go far out into the suburbs, which you can’t tell from the map, though the parallelogram styling of the map itself is one of the London Underground’s distinctions.  I recall some of the trains on the Bakerloo line – down by Elephant & Castle and the Imperial War Museum – were some really old wooden things.  What was that, Hogwarts?  At least the Underground did go to Heathrow, unlike the subways in Paris, NYC or DC.

 Moscow.  I took just one trip on the Moscow Metro, in March 1983, from the hotel to the ballet and back.  The interiors were beautiful:  huge murals of communist propaganda, statues of workers, peasants, soldiers, sailors (you know, those Kronstadt sailors).  Thank Stalin for this.

 Kiev.  Also in March 1983, but just two lines – one north-south, one east-west – and very old and grungy, somewhat like the London Underground or NY subway very run down.  I recall we just took one trip: from down town to the hotel (Bratislava – one of these concrete high rise monstrosities so ubiquitous in the Soviet Bloc).

 Bucharest.  Speaking of rundown, this was just like the rest of the city: extremely dirty, extremely nasty, but it seemed fairly modern nonetheless and the stops were fairly close together.  It was more extensive than Kiev’s.

 Rio de Janeiro.  Rio’s system is fairly new and looks like it.  The line starts at the end of Copacabana and winds its way up the coast to Zona Norte.  One fairly common complaint I hear about subway systems is that they give slum people a cheap and easy way to get into the better parts of town to do their dirty work – although the same applies to buses.  I never really used the Rio subway that much.

 The two most important features of a well-designed subway system are extensive coverage and variety in station designs; the former is functional and the latter aesthetic.  In that regard I’d say the Paris Metro is still the world’s best.  My fondest memories are of that Metro, partly due to familiarity, partly due to the fact that I never had to commute on that subway, although I have been on it when it was crowded, which was rare.