Subways Without Sandwiches

Public transportation in the United States leaves much to be desired. Due to a confluence of factors, the US has a much higher reliance on personal motor vehicles than other nations. This is unfortunate not only because mass transit can be efficient and more environmentally friendly than congested motor vehicle traffic, but because mass transit networks often feature interesting infrastructure and engaging station designs. For me, subway systems are the pinnacle of quality mass transit, but there are many options available to the inquisitive urban planner within all of us.

Trams (or streetcars or cable cars or trolleys, whichever name you're going for) suffer the most from a culture infatuated with cars. Their rail placement in streets can potentially hamper traffic flow and cause accidents with unwary drivers, which makes them more undesirable in American cities despite numerous advantages. After the 1970s many tram networks in the US saw hard times as the economic boom of the 1980s decreased passenger counts - even Milwaukee used to have streetcars. Buses tend to be the mode of choice now, due to their ease of integration into traffic patterns and their comparatively low initial cost (compared to trams which require a hefty preliminary investment in infrastructure, but are supposed to be cheaper to maintain).

Another alternative is an independent transportation network that doesn't share infrastructure with private traffic. Building a separate network for mass transportation can be expensive, but also avoids traffic problems and allows the transport of more passengers per operator. Light rail falls into this category and includes trams with a dedicated rail network or elevated trains like Seattle's monorail or Chicago's 'L'.

This is also where subways come in.

Due to their sleek infrastructure and efficiency, I enjoy subways as aesthetic and functional components of modern transportation. Of course, subways have varied reputations and qualities around the world. As a good starting point for this we have Berlin.


Berlin's transportation network is a combination of buses, trams, light rail (S-Bahn, or Stadtbahn - city rail), and subways (U-Bahn, or Untergrundbahn - subterranean rail). All of these together are run by BVG - the Berliner Verkehrsbetriebe - the Berlin Transportation Company (as you might notice the acronym doesn't make any sense unless you spell with imaginary Gs; it's a holdout from the company's older name, the Berliner Verkehrs-Aktiengesellschaft - the Berlin Transportation Corporation). The BVG works in conjunction with the German national rail company, Deutsche Bahn, because the individual S-Bahn trains travel beyond Berlin and Brandenburg and run on track dedicated to intranational rail traffic. The Berlin-Brandenburg network is divided into three sections called - conveniently enough - A, B, and C.

For a majority of visitors to Berlin the A-section will suffice. It includes all stations within the ring created by the S41 and S42 S-Bahn trains (the well-defined octagon in the picture here). Colloquially the ring is called the S-Bahn Ring (conveniently enough) or Ringbahn (circle line) or the Hundekopf (dog's head) due to its true geographical layout (it's not really an octagonal shape). The B-section contains Berlin's suburbs, and a few tourist-worthy sites. The C-section is in fact not Berlin (or a Cesarean), but Brandenburg (the city of Berlin sits in an administrative island surrounded by the German state of Brandenburg). The C-section is also useful for visitors to Berlin, because it includes travel to Potsdam (see things like World War 2 or Prussian history for more information).

One of the pitfalls of such a vast network is the difficulty in determining your route (still, probably easier than the MTA's map for New York City). This results in stations with their own passenger help kiosks and shopping malls, like Friedrichstrasse which sees the convergence of six lines, a collection of trams and buses, and a regional train station. There's also the more famous Alexanderplatz which saw a bit of action in the Bourne Supremacy due to its size and complexity (the triple-layered Alexanderplatz subway station is pictured here with entry level (top) and two train platforms (middle and bottom). However, this vast number of stations also allows for great variation in station architecture and design, as well as great opportunities for exploration. The enjoyment of sights, sounds, and smells is subjective for each individual station, but it's hard to not like at least one.

There's quite a bit you can glean about a country just by examining some of its network layout and stations. For example: the Berlin subways are remarkably clean - this cleanliness being maintained by a legion of custodial staff who seem to constantly make rounds. Most stations have clearly posted electronic signs displaying the time until the next train's arrival, as well as timetables for other trains. Those that don't have fancy signs usually at least have clocks (which some may tell you exemplifies German punctuality - those people are liars). Most trains run on 10 or 15 minute intervals during peak hours, and usually arrive on time. Most transportation shuts down around 2AM and has a few hours of downtime before starting up for morning commutes.

Riding on the trains of Berlin is incredibly easy, due to the fact that there are no turnstiles or transit authority personnel checking tickets at every station entrance. Passengers purchase tickets (coincidentally) at ticket vending machines or at passenger help kiosks. The process is highly automated and simple if you know where you want to go. You might think this setup would be prone to passengers riding without a ticket - known as Schwarzfahren in colloquial German (or if you want to brush up on your German legalese: Beförderungserschleichung - essentially "avoidance of paying a fare") - but it seems most people are fine buying a 3€ ticket instead of paying a 50€ fine.

This results in a number of ticket controllers going from train to train checking tickets like Indiana Jones (except with fewer people getting thrown out of blimps). This means buying a day ticket gives you free reign over riding whatever you want, to and from wherever you want, whenever you want (...in a day), with minimal hassle. A day ticket for all sections is 6.50€, which isn't bad for having hundreds of destination options and the span of two major cities. Compare it to New York City's 1-day Fun Pass MetroCard at $7.50 (half of that price is probably paying for the ink to print the name of the card).

Just like in New York, that ticket will also net you some public entertainment in the form of people that cannot abstain from playing music in public.

English - Enemy of the State

Americans - beyond a small enclave of Texans - will not need to listen to George W. Bush speak after January 20th, 2009 (although I'm sure quite a few haven't been listening recently, anyway). His mastery of the English language has brought us gems like "rarely is the question asked 'is our children learning?'", along with a rendition of Sunday Bloody Sunday. To be honest, his gaffes are minor compared to the illustrious James Danforth Quayle, who served as George H. W. Bush's vice president (maybe that's where Bush Jr. picked up some of those speech habits...). Many of the comedic, misspoken quotes ascribed to Bush are, in fact, Quaylisms. I suppose these sorts of things are going to crop up every once and a while if half the populace is voting for a guy they could "have a beer with."

But let's not be too hasty in judging their eloquence and use of English. Although it is relatively easy to be understood in English, the language is difficult to master. So, I'd like to point out a few factoids and interesting usage nuances in the English language. First up:


Factoid
Contrary to its common usage in news broadcasting, a factoid is not a "little fact". The suffix -oid is not used to form diminutives. That is: adding -oid to the end of a word does not make it tiny or small. The suffix "-oid" means "resembling" (often "imperfectly resembling"). Proper diminutive suffixes would be -ette or -let, like cigarette or piglet (so, factette or factlet).

Compare factoid with cuboid (resembling, but not quite a cube) and humanoid (resembling, but not quite a human) and the problem becomes immediately apparent. A factoid resembles a fact, but is not quite a fact. The term was coined in the 1970s referring to a bit of misinformation that was repeated so often that it appeared to be factual. Apparently trivia is a much too trivial word for many news anchors.


Discreet and Discrete


Not a factoid: the robots in Futurama almost exclusively have square pupils (Hedonismbot and others have circular ones on occasion).

That's right, I jumped right into the homonyms. While less common than their/there/they're, to/too/two, and for/fore/four, discrete and discreet are exciting words that even Microsoft Word won't fix. Discrete means separate or distinct; discreet means prudent or unobtrusive (the more usual meaning). Just to confuse the Romans in the crowd: both words derive from the Latin descretus (separated/discerned). Discreet entered common speech and developed into 'prudent', while discrete stuck with the more intellectual groups that used Latin and retained something closer to its original meaning.


Ado About Adieu
Let us discreetly separate these two out into their discrete uses.

Adieu, like many English words, is stolen from French (technically a parent language of modern French - Occitan...but let's see you try to find a school that teaches it). Its original meaning - now buried under a husk of modernism and evolved connotations - was "(I/we commend you) to God". Convention in English was that when one party departed from another they would say "adieu" to those that remained, while those that remained would say "farewell" to the departing group ("fare thou well" if you want to get all Middle English on me). I don't think that convention lasted all that long, but it may be important to note that English was not the primary language of much of the the nobility in England until around at least the 1360s. Now "adieu" just functions as a fancy way of saying goodbye.

Adieu exchanges positions with ado quite frequently - particularly in "without further ado". Ado is a fancy northern Scandinavian contraction for at do or "to do". It has also developed more into a noun meaning "trouble" or "fuss". "Without further ado" announces that the speaker has said everything necessary and the ceremony/play/whatever may continue unhindered.

Without further stalling for time...


Going Farther (or Further) with Farther (and Further)
The most subjective of the group here, some people don't bother acknowledging a difference between "farther" and "further". Technically farther should only refer to physical or spatial distance ("That field is farther away than this one."), while further should refer to the extent or degree of something ("Further understanding will require a lot of work."). That said, the use of either is fine for most people...unless they are a grammar Nazi - in which case you'll probably want to avoid using affect and effect, too.


Just trying to effect understanding of English.