Are the Valley and Los Angeles one and the same? The technical answer is, yes, most of the San Fernando Valley is a part of Los Angeles. But the debate is raging over at LAist on just how different the two sides of "the hill" really are.
Spurring the debate: Kevin Roderick's re-launch of his Valley-centric site, now retitled The Valley Observed. LAist's Carolyn Kellogg wonders if it's redundant to have both sites -- there's no VALLEYist or blogging.valley.la, after all. But Roderick, who literally wrote the book on the subject, responds here that indeed there is quite a difference, and goes into the Valley's "kissing cousin" relationship (I'd say it's more of a "kissing sister" relationship, since they both have the same parents) in this essay on the Valley's image.
Sitting here in Glendale, where our recently adopted town is about to celebrate its centennial (this weekend), I know we're technically part of the San Fernando Valley. But because the city is situated in a break in the mountains -- and our home is closer to Silver Lake, Atwater Village, Los Feliz and Glassell Park (not to mention Eagle Rock) than any other spot in "The Valley" -- it doesn't feel like it.
In a way, I sort of like it that way. We're not quite in the Valley, but we're not in Los Angeles either. We straddle both. There you go, Glendale -- I've given you your Centennial slogan, free of charge.
Glendale: We're the Tasty Meat in the Los Angeles/San Fernando Valley Sandwich.
No comments:
Post a Comment