[over the Pyrenees, Barcelona to London]
I have many aerial photos. I’ve got more than a hundred tagged as aerials in Flickr, but I upload only a small fraction of what I actually shoot, and I’m not a completely disciplined tagger, either. I’ve shot aerials from a range of aircraft, from helicopters to biplanes to WWII cargo planes to airliners.
I find the view from the sky as intriguing as the view from the ground, if not a little more so because I spend less time up there than down here. And coming from a previous life that revolved very much around aviation and getting up in the sky at every opportunity, I am offering another point of view. To go along with the view.
[Winnipeg to Vancouver]
[over the Vatnajökull glacier, the largest in Iceland]
[over the Hudson River, upstate New York]
[eastern shores of Lake Michigan]
This last pic above is Detroit. If you’ve flown over it, you’d probably guess it from the aerial. And if you’ve flown over it, you’ve probably been to the airport, which is pretty nice as airports go, and from this one I saw a spectacular sunset a couple of years ago. I’ve been to more airports than I’ve kept track of, but one trip I counted 11 — just in that one trip. It was only six years ago, but it feels like forever. I’ve been in many airports since, but I still like Detroit’s.
I’ve got airports on the brain because I just saw “Up In The Air” (2009). The opening aerials to the film are very interesting, showing the variety of settlement and farming patterns on the ground from a bird’s eye view. (And as I am writing this, there is news of an Air India crash. So I’m a little conflicted about continuing on my topic… I need to acknowledge that flying is not without its risks.)
I’ve also got Detroit on the brain, because I had planned to visit this weekend. There is a segment of the film which takes place in Detroit and is related to why I wanted to go in the first place. Moreover, this afternoon I received an email from another traveller in our original Detroit-bound group. She said:
…just a side note: I talked to 3 people who’ve been to Detroit before and all of them said that Detroit is a pretty boring city to go and pretty much reminds [x] of Buffalo. And 2 out of 3 advised to go to Cleveland instead.
I tried to tone down my response because initially I was more than a little ticked off, but she was just passing along information that was given to her — she’d never been. I have visited, but this was more than 16 years ago and much has happened to the local economy since then. Regardless, I still wanted to go, for my own reasons.
And this perhaps is why I get ticked off when I hear people pass off subjective statements about places (well, anything that is subjective) masked as “advice” — it is really NOT advice, it is opinion but without information!
“That movie is crap.”
“That restaurant is a waste of money.”
“It’s too dangerous to go there.”
It is very irresponsible for people to pass along an opinion without at least some clarification:
Why didn’t they like it?
What did they do?
What were they looking for?
Were their expectations out of line with reality?
Did they do any research?
I remember a few years ago when I told people I was going to Iceland, no-one could think of a single reason to go. “Iceland? What for?” I’m thankful I didn’t listen to anyone but myself. After all, who knows what I want to do better than me? (I often wonder about people who can’t seem to make a decision without consulting everyone around them.) I was pretty fascinated by Iceland, but it seemed at the time no-one knew anything about the country. Now that one of its volcanoes has wreaked havoc on air travel and closed down airports in Europe, suddenly people know at least ONE thing about Iceland: it has volcanoes!
The reason why I’m jumping to the defense of Detroit is because it is precisely the place that SHOULD be visited. For one thing, they certainly could use the tourist money. Everything I’ve heard from people in Toronto (who aren’t photographers) has been negative except one friend whose father is an architect and talks up the unique features of Detroit’s buildings. Otherwise all everyone seems to talk about is Detroit’s crime rate and the depressed economy. I simply cannot believe Detroit has nothing to offer, because media tends to dwell on BAD NEWS. I’m not denying the facts or reports, I’m saying there is more to Detroit than what you see on the news or read in newspapers.
It’s not that I’m looking to move to Detroit, anyway, I just want to visit and take photos and meet the locals. Anywhere that produces a sound like Motown is someplace I want to visit. Detroit has a long history of producing groundbreaking modern music, from rock and roll to techno to rap. And you know what? Their hockey team does pretty well…
While I’m on the subject, The Jackson Five were from Gary, Indiana, Madonna’s from Bay City, Michigan, The Black Keys are from Akron, Ohio — these are all considered “unexciting” places. I’ve made the observation long ago (and felt it somewhat proven by Iceland), that the more isolated a place, the starker and bleaker the winters get, the more creative people become. When there is “nothing” to do, that is when you start creating, because it is borne out of a human need to stamp out boredom and connect with other people.
I have one basic tenet, one guiding principle that is the foundation of how I travel: if people live there, it is worth visiting. I am not an academic, but I take an academic approach to most things: few things are categorically ‘good’ or ‘bad’, just ‘different’. It’s like people: not everyone gives a great first impression, with some people you have to get to know them first. It’s why I moved to Glasgow after living in Edinburgh, even though all the tourists go to Edinburgh instead of Glasgow. I believe Detroit’s one of those cities: it’s maybe gruff and scruffy, bruised and battered, knocked down… but far from out.
