WHY I HATE ENGLAND

As usual, you don't know what you're talking about. Road trips are nostalgia, harking back to childhood. The children don't drive, heavy traffic doesn't mean anything to them. It's not as though the States is a land of empty spaces, either. Drive from Boston to Richmond and you'll almost never leave urban areas and heavy traffic--Boston, New Haven, New York, Newark, Philadelphia, Baltimore, Washington . . . you won't hit open country until you're in Virginia and the trip is almost over. Radar detectors are illegal in Virginia and they're death on speeders.

Young people who do road trips are reliving an aspect of their childhood, usually enhanced by alcohol and/or drugs. I was partying with some friends in southern Illinois near St. Louis one evening, and awoke the next morning about 11:00 a.m. in Texas, heading west. Someone asked who we knew in Texas and i said: "Patty lives in Houston." We got to Houston in late afternoon, and parked in front of Patty's apartment. About seven, she knocked on the driver's side window (we were in her parking space), and the guy who had been driving rolled down the window. She looks in and says: "Devin? . . . what . . . road trip?" It's a 'Merican thing--y'all wouldn't understand.

As a child I can remember being stuck in traffic on holiday to Devon. I didn't enjoy that part at all, which is probably why it's not part of our collective nostalgia, not to mention smaller cars and the higher cost of fuel.

As always you've picked up the wrong end of the stick. I'm not criticising the American passion for the road trip, On The Road could only have been written by an American, and it's a very good piece of writing.

I was merely pointing out the factors that stop us feeling about the roadtrip in quite the same way as you.

I didn't say you were criticizing anything, i'm just pointing out that you don't understand. Go ahead and have the last word, though . . . i'll be waiting to see what others have to say . . .

I do understand, we see a lot of American culture over here. The road movie is a genre all to itself, and by and large the subject seems to take up most of Kerouac's writing.

With lots of motorways, autobahns, fast cars etc- driving long distances is a bit different.
I agree with you that driving in a dense area is different to driving somewhere with little to no traffic. Up in northern Sweden people could easily drive for a couple of hours to have coffee wheras down south we would go maybe half-one hour. Our friends, the restaurants etc were so much closer than up north.
It used to be that the main roads went through every little village, town and city so driving took much longer time just a few decades ago than it would today.
The dencer populated the slower was driving.
Also the size of a country means something. Driving to Stockholm is 500 kilometers or 1/3 of Sweden. That is psychological kind of "enough is enough"
Going from Copenhagen to Esbjerg is 300 kilometres and takes now 3 hours.
Used to take much longer with ferries etc. When you went half way it was Odense and a nice place at least to make a pause. Today it takes only 1.45 min.

It was a naive attempt at best. Kerouac was , like spendi, a master at the bleedin obvious.
I liked Steinbecks Sea of Cortez better ( Im a student of the postulate that "ALL ADVENTURE IS THE RESULT OF BAD PLANNING". orta like Scott and his horses, or Lewis and Clark and their folding
Kevlar boats.

I prefer "In a Small Country" as a nice chunk of writing that transmits a single opinion about a country like Britain.


When I read a lot of Kerousac back in HS, I was already an overuser of punctuation. I was appalled at how Kerouac was stuck on this notion that punctuation was kind of bourgeois

I'm afraid that all I really know about Lewis and Clark is what I saw on the Simpsons.

I agree with you about Kerouac's use of punctuation, I still enjoyed it though.

I certainly realize that they actually speak English - I was joking that they don't speak English because of how thick their accent was. I thought you Brits were big into jokes - guess you can't catch them all. In and around London - I loved the accent - it sounded kinda "royal" - I'd call it speaking the Queen's English. It is clear and almost perfectly spoken.

I kind of compare these guys accents to some one in the US with a really thick redneck type accent or even a thick Revere or similar accent (town outside of Boston) or a NY Brookyln accent kinda tough and almost dumb sounding.

Ever see that movie - can't remember the life of me what the movie was - but it had Mick Jagger in it and Whoppie Goldberg - they only thing I remember about it was when Whoppie yelled at Mick - Speak English Mick! Of course in reference to a strong accent with lots of Brit slang in it.

You have to understand Izzy is way intelligent - way beyond us American's intelligence.

We were in London some years ago and talked with a couple which spoke cockney and it was difficult to understand everything. Afterwards an American couple in all seriousness said:"Isn´t it wonderful to hear real Queen´s English spoken?"
I was able to keep a straight face.

They wear silly things on their heads and call them hats

I once was in London visiting of course. I was by myself at the time (my friend was resting in our B&B) - so I'm not too far from Buckingham Palace near Victoria Station. This very well dressed older women obviously just getting off the train from some where in the country walk up to me and asked with their proper Queen's English accent ask me where Buckingham Palace is -- being familar with the area I open my mouth and speak in perfect Boston accent to give them directions. Their mouths just dropped --- I found perfectly entertaining to be out of my country and being able to direct people from their country on directions.

I think you're thinking of the film Jumping Jack Flash. Whoopie Goldberg is in it, but Mick Jagger isn't. He co-wrote the song with Keith Richards that gave the film its name. The British spy in the film is played by Jonathan Pryce.

The main prerequisite for a joke is that it has to be funny, that's what probably threw me.

The entire tag states satire - but funny that others caught the joke, but then again you are way intelligent so a simple joke wouldn't be caught by you.

I understand - you way intelligent.

I know what the tag says, and by and large all of the posts did gently poke a bit of fun, until I got to yours, which was just nasty.

Nothing nasty - you are the only one that thought so - I think you just do not understand. Read thoroughly and you will see that I poke fun at my own area and accent.

But I understand you are the type that cannot admit you may have mis-understand - instead you claim unfunny - rather than take ownership of your own lack of understanding.

I've read it elsewhere when you post. You are way intelligent - above all else within A2k.

Here's something I find irritating about the English, England etc.
They say something must be done straightaway.

"Fox said Abdul had to be fired straightaway." Simon said.

And, even more inexplicably, persons are found to be gone missing.

"When friends started making inquires as to her whereabouts, it became obvious that she had gone missing."

Note to izzythepush: Lighten up, we are in love with you.

Joe(Gone, baby, gone)Nation

I guess they don't do irony . . .



hehehehehe . . . i crack me up . . .