Correction, it was meant to be set in imaginary city somewhere halfway in-between where LA and San Fran would meet in an advanced urban sprawl.
Regards, Quest -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 27 May 2004 04:30 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: 313@hyperreal.org Subject: Re: (313) Detroit and Geography yep - let us not forget that Blade Runner was supposed to be set in L.A. - maybe that's why Juan moved out there? MEK [EMAIL PROTECTED] et To: 313@hyperreal.org cc: 05/26/04 12:37 PM Subject: Re: (313) Detroit and Geography there's going to be a duality anyplace you live- LA has that paradise, sunny, beautiful, poluted, third world, end of manifest destiny apocolypse thin going. SF has that hippie, homegrown, organic, foggy, rough ocean, wrath of nature vibe Detroit is all industrial, downtrodden, harsh, working class, salt-of-the-earth, overcoming, uplifting you can flip it however you want it On Wed, 26 May 2004, Greg Earle wrote: > On Wed, 26 May 2004 02:45:59 +0100, James Bucknell wrote: > > I don't buy the geography argument. > > Neither do I. I live in LA, with one of the best climates in the world > (OK OK, minus the smog bit), and I'm rockin' tha D all the time here. > > (Aside: I was probably the biggest Joy Division fan in the States back > when they were extant, despite the fact that sometimes it doesn't > rain here for months on end. I considered them uplifting, not "doom > n' gloom".) > > People don't become House-heads in San Francisco because of the > change in climate from where they came from; it's because they're > always surrounded by a bunch of [EMAIL PROTECTED]' Hippies once they get > there ;) > > - Greg (whose [blonde] "Kill The Hippies" Punk roots are showing) > >
