City of Angels 2017-18

“After hours, Bobby goes home. House’s in Koreatown, edge of Pico-Union. Maybe it’s Koreatown, but he owns it. Stucco job with two palm trees in front. Nobody home. Just him” (Yamashita, 18). Here are some questions. Don’t feel obligated to respond to all of them. If one angle interests you more than the other, take it. What about Koreatown makes Bobby feel at home? What do you make of the sentence “Maybe it’s Koreatown, but he owns it"? What about Koreatown gives us that downbeat, that disclaimer, “maybe?” How does he own it? Does his ownership have to do with his work, his identity, his relationships, or the American Dream? Does he seem to enjoy his “stucco job?” As an immigrant, do his expectations meet reality? Are the “two palm trees” real or fake? How might Bobby’s opinion about palm trees compare to Buzzworm’s and his classmates’ (Chapter 4, bottom of page 32)? How does the fact that he’s alone change the meaning of “home?” What does that say about Bobby’s characte...

When researching Noir in Los Angeles, I came across a Daily News article ( http://www.dailynews.com/2014/05/03/union-station-in-los-angeles-is-a-film-noir-star/ ) stating that Union Station is a “film Noir Star.” Before the urban lab we went on last week, I never thought of Union Station as an iconic Noir monument, but once we were assigned to take the various images, the station felt much older and, in a way, became an accurate reflection of what we know as Noir. I started to wonder what other places in Los Angeles also had a history on the screen or in art. Along a similar line, I was also curious about how certain places had reputations that changed throughout time or how they changed in our eyes once we viewed them as significant to the movie and art industry in LA. When watching Chinatown , I was always looking for places that I might recognize in present day. I was also curious about the choices that were made in terms of location for movies, and what those choices say about LA. ...

During our urban lab today, we traveled to Union Station. I have been to Union Station many times, but never during work hours on a weekday. As a person who typically drives everywhere, I often times do not use the metro as a means of transportation, however, while riding this morning, a new light of how practical the metro is was shed upon me. As a result of this realization, questions about Los Angeles as a whole and the population's transportation through it were brought to my attention. Regardless of where you live, do you often take the metro? If you had the choice wether to take the metro or drive everyday to your daily destination, which one would you choose and why? What are some benefits and disadvantages of taking the metro? Why do you believe that driving is more prevalent in Los Angeles than taking the metro? And finally do you believe LA will ever reach New York's level of efficiency in terms of its metro transportation?

Today as a class we visited Union Station, one of the country's most used train stations. Union station has been a major transportation hub for Angelenos for many years. As we explored the station and saw the various people passing through as a part of their journey to wherever they were going, the importance of transportation in Southern California became more apparent to me and my group than ever before. With that in mind, traffic in California has constantly increased every year, resulting in more and more pollution. What has your experience with transportation been like in Los Angeles, and how has that experience changed as you have grown up? In what ways could the Metro and government make taking the Metro a more appealing option than driving? With the Metro making an effort to making all areas of Los Angeles more accessible by increasing its span across LA, what are its effects on the community that the stops are located? In what ways do you believe transportation in Los An...