Amsterdam - be careful where you aim

I had a great time on a student travel company-organized trip to Amsterdam for last weekend. The student travel company-organized part wasn't so great (the bus ride was really long and it was plagued with the mentality and lack of leadership characterized by most groups like that), but spending time with the internationals from Grey was undoubtedly one of the highlights of the term. Amsterdam would have been a bit of a letdown if it weren't for the people I traveled with. The whole city seemed a bit gloomy. It was overcast, the streets were pretty empty, etc. It didn't really matter since I was able to keep it fun by doing touristy stuff with the kids from my college. If I could go back some time when it was more lively, I think it might remind me a bit of the Bay Area. Everyone rides bikes which is a very environmentally conscious/hippy thing to do. There were something like 50 thousand of them stolen last year in Amsterdam - reminds me of Berkeley. There's also a large LGBT population just like SF. Gulianna, Zeid, and I walked into a gay bar without realizing it until Zeid got hit on by a Dutch guy.

Here are some photos from around town:

Left to right: Julia (Germany), Tess (Belgium and Portugal), Darek (Poland), Justin (Sweden), Sid (Kenya), Etienne (France), Ben (Norway), Kenneth (Singapore), Jeff (USA), Arnaud (France), and Ulysse (France). Also on the trip but not in this photo: Giulianna (Italy) and Zeid (Tunisia)

I didn't know if this guy was stealing a bike or just testing out his new saw:

If your jaw's tired from a long day of talking, check out the Special Chin Rest:

The city is very beautiful. It has a distinct character to it:

Kenneth (Singapore), Ben (Norway), and I went to the Anne Frank house which was better than expected. It only takes a short amount of time to see and is another thing to check off my list of European historical sites to see. It's small, which is to be expected - it wouldn't have been such a sad story if it weren't for the confining conditions of their seclusion and, even worse, the persecution that put them there in the first place. It brought the history to life just that little bit more. I might read her diary over spring or summer break.

We also checked out the Heineken brewery/museum. That was probably the best Heineken will ever taste and I still wasn't blown away. While it was a cool thing to go do with friends, it's just not my favorite beer.

The girl who took this picture asked if we were all Americans since I was the one to ask for the photo. Not quite: a Kenyan, a Singaporean, a Belgian, a German, a Pole, a Norwegian, and one American

We also checked out the red light district, which I don't have photos from. I had heard stories about people getting their cameras thrown into the canal (although, those might have been completely exaggerated) by security guards who work at the brothels/apartments in the area, so I left mine in my pocket. The fact that they have a red light district points to the tolerance and openness of their political culture. They figure, if it's going to happen, why not regulate it? Legalizing prositution was an issue that came up in a Youth and Government debate I can remember from about 4 years ago. To most Americans, especially politicians who would have to vote on the bill, it would seem like an endorsement or a way of saying that it was o.k. The same idea applies to legalizing weed, which is actually an issue that's currently being mobilized at the grass (no pun intended) roots level in California. Seeing this first-hand was a complete 180 from that kind of idea. And I would say that it does seem more safe overall. But it does create some ironies. For instance, you have to go outside of a 'coffeeshop' to smoke a cigarette, but you can smoke all the weed you want inside. It's just strange to see coming from a place where anything that's not legal (alcohol and prescription drugs) are so demonized. I would like to think a lot of young people are moving to the left and towards this Dutch way of thinking - but it's so off-the-wall bizzare to think about applying it to the US. Especially with the (largely uninformed) Tea Party activists coming out in big numbers.

Here's another example of how their attitude towards social issues. To stop guys from peeing on buildings (or maybe into the canals, I don't know what the original problem was), they put in a number of public urinals on street corners and in the middle of squares. On a windy day, you have to be careful of your aim. Ben demonstrates how it's done:

The British Monarchy

Here's the wordiest post I'll have on the blog. It's an essay I wrote for my history of British politics class. It discusses why the monarchy is still around. There were significant movements in other parts of Europe away from monarchy, so it's interesting that the Brits still have theirs. I was talking to Ben from Norway who said there's still a Scandinavian country with a king (though he's also just a figurehead). It's even more surprising that a nation in that region would have a monarchy given their strong commitment to social welfare and other very democratic elements of government.

British Democracy Essay #2: Why was there no significant republican movement during the early twentieth century?

In the early 20^th Century, Conservatives look to the monarchy as a source of unity and use religion and an artificial conception of public image in their fight against republicanism and radical foreign influence.The monarchy in particular is able to stress the importance of national values (echoed by Conservatives, especially Baldwin) and maintain its relevance in an increasingly democratic time.

The monarchy stands to be eliminated in the face of liberal ideas flowing through Europe - republicanism, socialism, and Communism would all have eliminated the institution based on the principle of hierarchy, but it survived. Interest groups, including political parties, did not simply revere the crown and leave the institution unquestioned. This was not just due to media self-censorship and the taboo surrounding criticism. The lack of criticism was purposeful – organizations and individuals looked to gain from its patronage.

According to Philip Williamson, “The monarchy retained its considerable prominence in the more democratic conditions of the early twentieth century because it became more purely the symbol and exponent of a particular set of public values, values promoted by almost all public organizations and respected by most of the general public.” By finding ways to keep itself relevant through philanthropy and national unity, the monarchy could push its conception of a set of public values which would further support its role against republican movement.

This national unity was also seen in Parliament. Baldwin is one of the main proponents of uniting the country through public values. He speaks of “...that mysterious and romantic land of Shropshire, so close to us, from which my people came only three generations before... watching the smoke of the train running along the little railway through places...steeped in romance and redolent of the springtime of an England long ago passed, but whose heritage is ours.” He sought to ignite support for the status quo and spark patriotism to address appeals to class from the political left. Anything that was outside these ideals was denounced as unwanted foreign influence. His speechwriting skill was instrumental in creating homespun imagery which spoke to the public.

The monarchy’s main activities of self-preservation all fall under the umbrella dynamism. They have to find a way to remain relevant in a rapidly changing circumstances. To encourage further unity and national stability against republicanism, they pursue greater public visibility and give more speeches. This gives them a chance to dictate their own role and establish their particular ideas of public values. These values still have to appeal to the people – content and speechwriting is important. Central to being a symbol of unity is inoffensiveness with no partisan agenda. This meant the speechwriting duties were shifted away from the arguably undereducated monarchs to their advisors. The monarchs themselves are powerless: ‘The King would have to sign a bill for his own execution had the government put one before him.’ Politicians on the left say this powerlessness is democratic. They say it’s better to have a powerless head of state than a president with real powers who can become an autocrat. This was more important than the hierarchical principles that a monarchy explicitly represents.

We can see this inoffensive approach to politics highlighted in monarchs’ dealings with the Labour party. George V keeps a level head rather than panicking with Labour’s rise to power. Maintaining ‘neutrality’ in this situation was key. Parties are not willing to drag the monarchy to their level for their own uses – even the socialist leaning Labour party. It would destabilize the system far too much and outweigh any potential short term gains. The 1923 Labour party convention motion to take stance against monarchy goes nowhere; nobody had any serious grievances against the Crown. The claim that 1937 Abdication Bill nearly included votes for a republic from 100 Labour MPs is founded on misread sources, according to Williamson. Indeed, during the 1937 Coronation, Labour spokesmen promoted the monarchy as a democratic institution supported by the people.

Prochaska is one of the main historians to point out the importance of the Crown’s work with hospitals, welfare charities, religious, education, youth and sporting associations, the British Legion, etc. Capitalists donating to charities that cure what the socialists decry as the ailments of capitalism takes the wind out of socialist sails. Many of the over 1000 groups the crown supports work to ameliorate the effects of poverty.Although this role has been lessened somewhat with the emergence of the welfare state, it is still central to what the monarchs do. They have found ways to support similar organizations to maintain support.

In addition to philanthropy, there has to be something to overcome the backwardness of hierarchy if the question of class is to be settled and the monarchy preserved. I am convinced by the argument that philanthropy and the monarch’s role as the head of the Anglican church create a duty (called ‘unbearable’ by some) to the nation, thus engendering support. I do not believe, however, that significant support arises from seeing royal blunders and realizing money does not buy happiness. The monarchs reached out through rhetoric to those most susceptible to radical anti-monarchical ideas during the first part of the 20th Century.These are the kind of people discussed in Orwell’s 1937 Road to Wigan Pier, chapter 7. Orwell stresses the kind of regional divide and class based inequality the crown must address. The royals and Orwell find common ground in pointing to the family as the central unit of working class families. In a similar move, the king seizes on the photo-op of the royal palace bombing in the blitz, showing that they are in this to the same extent the (working class) public was.

A result of turning to the media to highlight their more public image of common values and philanthropic work has been an increasingly public life for the royal family. Entertainment on the level of the human interest story has become a secondary, unofficial role for the crown. They have become another set of celebrities in British tabloids. There has been a change in the perception of media’s role with the monarchy since Bagehot wrote his English Constitution. At that time, it was the distance at which the public was kept that created the ‘magic’ surrounding the monarchy. Bagehot does still point to the popularity coverage of the royal family which would continue to the present day: the monarchy pulls the job of governance down to the personal level – people care more about people than government procedure. Bagehot explains where the appeal comes from: “Just so a royal family sweetens politics by the seasonable addition of nice and pretty events. It introduces irrelevant facts into the business of government, but they are facts which speak to “men’s bosoms” and employ their thoughts.”

At this time, the monarchy was above criticism, seen largely as the central unifying force in British society. Keeping the monarch’s image gleaming in its usual lustre would maintain this image – self-censorship of the media was patriotic. “The more the monarchy had become elevated above sectional controversies, the more convincing and useful it became in symbolizing and universalizing values which most public and voluntary bodies considered essential for the general interest.” This does not imply an age of political consensus across all issues. It only extended to a basic level of constitutional, social, and moral issues.

Media support was further expanded with the advent of mass culture in cinemas and on television.WWI propaganda put royals in newsreels for the first time. Cinemas construction expanded greatly between 1914-1934 from 3 to 5 thousand with 23 million attending weekly(constituting 40% of the 1939 population).This highly visible image of the monarch in a role of national unity is the one Cannadine argues for in the ‘invention of tradition’. The newsreels, along with increasingly popular BBC radio were invariably supportive of the monarchs (even during the abdication). George VI’s shy nature and stammer were major problems given the new role of the monarch as a public speaker and his appearances on newsreels. Companies deliberately censored the parts that make him look bad. Elizabeth II’s coronation pulls in huge ratings in the increasingly important use of television in 1953. It was also released with great success as a film.

Though they were initially beyond criticism, the monarchy had become more dependent on the media for its own survival. To portray a morally upright family image to the public, they needed the media’s reporting. This eventually would mean opening their home to both good and bad press as the taboo surrounding criticism faded. This interest would later develop into coverage of scandal – what Richards refers to as a humanizing and relatable ‘super soap opera’. Despite the scandal of abdication and Diana’s saga, approval ratings for the monarchy remain over higher than 70%. “The most significant political feature of the [abdication] is that there was, after all, no real crisis.” Abdication may have been a slip in the monarch as an example of perfect morality, but the episode does stress is the call to duty for the monarch. He is held to a different standard; everything he does is for his country.

The monarchy also plays a lesser role as the head of the empire and head of the Church of England. The Statute of Westminster leaves the monarch as only link to the territories. The monarch promotes commercial and political interests as a figurehead overseas during the early 20^th C. According to Grimley, “A pervasive sense remained that national culture and identity were inexorably tied up with Protestantism.” Religion, then is another tool for the establishment in their anti-socialist appeals. Though the number of churches and some attendance statistics declined during the period, their importance to national identity did not. This increased awareness of a national character gives the newly expanded electorate direction and civic education. Conflict between protestant sects had fallen off after WWI. This means Anglicans can talk about their leadership in religious matters of the country without division and dissent (and thus, the king can act as a leader of the entire nation rather than just one religious sect - we can see this through the official Day of Thanksgiving and Days of Prayer around the time of the Second World War.) Most in the Anglican Church who talk about unity talk about Englishness, not British identity. Religious unity did not have as strong an effect on the Welsh and Scottish populations.

The clear importance of religion to the English at this time makes it a key instrument for the monarchy to support national unity. “Religion was something that lay deep in the English people but that could not be controlled by outsiders.” Baldwin introduces a religious aspect to his discussion in his rhetoric by saying that the radical ideas bubbling in the rest of Europe create a spiritual crisis at home. Grimley emphasizes that English religious culture is non-revolutionary and moderate: “...the low temperature of Anglicanism—its reticence and aversion to enthusiasm—was one of the reasons why the alien plant of Communism would never take root in England. Anglican reticence was portrayed as a strength, not a weakness—part of the wider restraint that was so typical of the national character.”

By using traditional institutions, religion, and very specific ideas of public values, the Conservatives were able to stave off republican or socialist movements at a time when Europe’s traditional fabric was unravelling. Even if Baldwin’s images are not representative of every Briton, they create a sense of unity essential to democratic life. Citizens must see themselves as an important part of the political system to become an active part of it and preserve their rights. Without this sense of patriotism and duty inspired by the crown (and others who stress national identity), measures of involvement in government like turnout could be considerably lowered.

Some observations from throughout the year

I'll update this post as I come up with more stuff for it:

I'm starting to think that the British do drink more than Americans. Statistics on which countries consume the most alcohol back this up, but I haven't seen any separated by age groups.

I never understood how a lack of potatoes could cause a famine in a non-3rd world country - until now. There are 2 or 3 types of potatoes at every meal in the dining hall. I'll probably take a break from it when I get back home. For now, it's a staple. Meals are also pretty heavy, inducing 'food coma' resulting in mid-day naps every now and then.


The semester system (and the quarter system to a greater extent) makes it easier to ditch classes you don't like. Durham runs on a year long system. Two terms are lectures and seminars and the third is studying and exams. The approach that one of my professors is taking towards his class is making it almost unbearable given how long the class lasts. It would be nice to move on to some new topics.

A couple of my classes try to overreach in terms of curriculum. The professors are trying to cover too much ground, in my opinion. In order to go where they're leading us as students, we either need a better historical or technical understanding (in something like economics, for example) to really get it.

British chocolate isn't too bad. It's no Swiss chocolate, but it's better than Hershey's. I didn't realize that Twix and Snickers were British candy bars before George corrected me one day.


A lot of kids around here wear t-shirts, sweatshirts, etc. with references to California on them. It's cool to have those reminders of home and to think that California has a 'cool' image internationally.


Brits don't get out of the way on sidewalks. I talked to one of the California girls about this one and she said she'd also noticed it. It's a small thing, but an interesting difference. They also don't stick to the left side of the walkway as they do on the roads. On escalators, for instance, they stand on the right and pass on the left, as one would in the US.


Durham is the safest place I've ever lived. It has that small town vibe - people leave their laptops sitting out in the library when they go to dinner. You'd never see your computer again if you did that in Berkeley.

Every other British girl is named Emma or Lucy. There's must be a law somewhere - it's worse than the USA's obsession with names like Michael and Jennifer.

Even though everyone speaks English around here, you have to be careful with your language. There are two examples I can think of. 1) 'Trousers' is used for what we would call pants. But 'pants' to them means underwear. So if you don't differentiate between the two, you end up talking about your underwear at the wrong time. When George came to my room to see if I wanted to go to dinner with the other folks from the hall, I said "sure, but I just got out of the shower and need to put some pants on." From a British point of view, it seemed like I was about to go commando to dinner. 2) 'Rubber' is the word for what we'd call an eraser - makes sense, since it's made out of rubber. But it seems a little out of place when someone says they're headed off to math class and they need a pencil and a rubber. Before I realized what they were talking about, I started thinking that math lectures in the UK were far more exciting than the ones in Berkeley.


Positives and negatives of Durham as a place to study abroad:
Positives:

1. It's a unique setting, especially coming from an place with little history before 1849 (the California missions are the exception that come to mind). Small town, different climate, etc. It's not completely different from Berkeley, as my experience is still dominated by student culture.
2. Greater academic independence has given me some new tools to use when I get back to Berkeley. Social science lectures include less spoon feeding of information (1 hour p/week p/class in lectures) which means we head to the library to supplement. I'm not sure that I'll continue using the library at Berkeley that much when I return, since it's not necessary, but at times it can feel more fulfilling.
3. Basketball isn't as competitive over here, so it's easier to find people playing just to have fun. Athletics on the whole are much more inclusive in the college system. It's a university-wide intramural system that encourages all levels to participate. The social aspect of it is big, too. Team captains are responsible for setting up team dinners, nights out in town, etc. It's a great way to spend time with friends and have fun with your favorite sport at the same time. Here's Grey's team - we have Brits, 'Frenchies', a Greek, a Norwegian, a pair of guys from Hong Kong, and me:
4. Studying abroad in general is a great way to meet people from all over the world. The international students at Grey are some of the warmest people I've met in my time over here. Almost all of us went to Amsterdam together for a weekend trip - it was lots of fun.

Negatives:

1. It's constantly wet and/or cold. People use the ledges outside their windows as refrigerators. Even late spring has had a lot of cold, overcast days. Without much sunshine, we're taking drastic measures to keep our vitamin d up to healthy levels:
2. There's absolutely zero diversity on campus. It's about what I expected, but something of a shock coming from California in general and La Crescenta and Berkeley more specifically. Diversity at Berkeley really sparks a lot of liveliness on campus.
3. There's not great transportation in the region to go see other places. Newcastle's airport doesn't fly to some of the places I went during my break, so I had to find roundabout ways to get there to take advantage of cheap flights. This is a symptom of Durham being a small town (the only reason it is called a city is its cathedral).

Normandy

I had a really interesting time in Normandy. It was not the best time to be there due to weather and the fact that they were in the tourist low season. If you wanted a tour of the beaches, you were out of luck. Snow had hampered the area for the past 2 weeks and many locals hadn't been able to go anywhere for three days prior. On the plus side, I already knew something about the history and could show myself around. There was good information in English throughout the major sites (especially the American Cemetery). Unfortunately, my camera ran out of juice in the middle of the day. I still got some cool shots - mostly of Point Du Hoc, a place where a Ranger battalion mounted steep cliffs to overtake a heavily fortified German position.

That still wasn't the best part of the day. At closing time at the American Cemetery on the east end of Omaha Beach, I participated in the ceremony to take down the flags that fly over the headstones. The guy holding the other end was an Eagle Scout - everything about the ceremony was very patriotic. We pulled the flag down, folded it, and handed it to a 30 year veteran who lives and works full time at the cemetery. It was definitely a once in a lifetime opportunity. Any other time I go back, it would likely be in the high-season and much more crowded. I guess there are benefits to traveling when there is no transportation to support your trip. It was a great day and an awesome way to geek-out on history. It's nice to really experience the sites.

Looking down Omaha Beach towards the American Cemetery

In Bayeux, the closest town to the beaches

On Point du Hoc at one of the bunkers

Folding the flag in the cemetery

Paris

Paris was by far one of my favorite parts of my time in Europe so far. It's right up there with London, the pair of good days on the hill in Switzerland, and the ancient ruins of Rome. Like London, I felt like I could have spent another two weeks there without running out of really interesting things to see. Adding the experience of living there would give even more things to experience and people to meet.

The city was beautiful. The architecture was beautiful and the design of the broad central squares and boulevards was really incredible. It gives a sense of a city that really has its act together (though French transport was hardly ever on time). The metro within the city was very efficient and covered the whole city - great for tourists.

I found the people I met throughout France to be very helpful and accommodating with language barrier and information. That goes against most American prejudices and stereotypes and was a pleasant surprise.

I was also able to catch up with some American friends during my stay. Had a great time with Diane and her friends with a night out at the Louvre and a few bars (a big thanks to the Berkeley kids who put us up for the night after the Metro closed). Caught up on Berkeley news with Steven and Jen over lunch. It was great to see someone from my home continent.

Another thing I've realized during my travels is how cool Aussies are. They've been in hostels everywhere since it's their summer break. I had a great time on the last day with good weather touring Versailles with Matt and James, two guys from down under. I also spent some time on my last day talking with Nathan, another Aussie, and Cassie from Claremont, CA. We exchanged some stories and photos from our travels. Cassie had spent a good amount of time in Eastern Europe. Talking to the two of them made me want to go see some of the things they had seen (thought, at another time - I've had enough travel over the past month). Between the Aussies and Cassie, I'd say it's easy to have a good time travelling by yourself in hostels.

The French term for Hall of Mirrors can also be translated as 'Hall of Ice Cream'. It would be interesting to see Ben and Jerry do a redesign but if they're going with the 'Hall of Mirrors' translation, they did a pretty impressive job:

Notre Dame Cathedral still has its Christmas tree up - must be like those lazy neighbors who never take the lights down:

With Steven in front of Sacre Cour looking over a cloudy Paris:

Tomb of the Unknown Soldier under the Arc du Triomphe looking down to La Defense, the financial district:

on the second level of the Eiffel Tower:

Maybe I don't need an SLR after all:

Really strange mix of modern and classic architecture:

The facade of the Louvre is photogenic at night:

On a historical note - empty frames after the evacuation of the Louvre before the Nazi invasion:

Last two days in Switzerland

I had a great last two days in Switzerland! The weather had made the skiing difficult on my second and third days on the hill. Heavy fog covered most of the runs and flat light meant you couldn't see any detail in the snow. You had to do some mighty careful steppin' to no end up on your face (especially coming over rises onto patches of ice where edges were as useful as a long metal pole in a thunderstorm). A day away from the slopes proved to be worthwhile.

I took a train to Bern (the Swiss capital) to meet up with Florence and Marc (family friends) for a great night. We started out at the local arena for a pro hockey game (Bern v. Rapperswil-Jona). Hockey is the second most popular sport after soccer. The players were basically billboards (the opposing team had 'Erotik Markt' in big red letters across their backs). There was lots of spirit in the home team's rowdy seating section. It's the same sort of thing you'd find at a European soccer match - songs, chants, etc. They had their own drumline and cheerleaders. Florence is the coach for the cheerleading team which is why we were at the game in the first place. Seems like a cool perk to get free tickets to the games. The good guys won and we headed to a concert.

Florence's boyfriend is a talented professional musician. He had a gig with his band at a small bar/club in Biel where he laid down some great basslines. The music was what Florence and Marc called 'French blah-blah'. The lyrics were humorous, I'm told. It was an interesting brand of jazz. We hopped around to a couple bars until I was ready to collapse (full day of skiing plus all the stuff I just talked about - I was pretty beat).

The next day, Florence and Ursula (another family friend) gave me a tour of Biel and Bern. Bern's a nice city. It's exactly what I would expect from the Swiss - clean and serene. I saw some stuff I hadn't seen in Bern two years ago when I walked around with family. Florence also knows a lot more about Swiss history than I do. She showed me the city's mascot perched on the hill next to the river that runs through the city. To name the city, someone said the first animal they shot on a hunt would be the name. It was a bear, like the one on the canton's flag. They now have bears safely hemmed in just outside the center of the city (one idiot was mauled when he hopped into the pen recently, though). After the tour, we grabbed an early dinner at a Mexican restaurant (surprisingly good) before Florence and Ursula so graciously drove me all the way back to Interlaken.

Some photos from Bern:

The day after the tour of Bern I hit the slopes again. I had though about sitting out for the day if the weather looked like it had for the two previous days of skiing. I'm glad I didn't because it was a beautiful day. Blue skies and the snow was still remarkably fresh even though there had been no new powder since I'd been in town. It seems like there are lower temperatures on the mountain which allow the snow to stay soft and less icy for longer. Coming up in a few days is the world cup race on the Lauberhorn. I couldn't believe how steep this run is in a few places. The pros get down in 2 or 3 minutes (the longest downhill course in the world - it wraps around from the Kleinne Shiedegg area down to Wengen), but it took me about 20 minutes to cruise down at a comfortable pace taking some photos along the way. The lines they have these guys taking are insane. They basically point their skis straight down the hill and prey that their edges don't slip. There were some huge jumps, too. With as uncontrollable as pro racing skis are, I don't know how they get down a course like this in one piece. I'd be done after two turns (on a good day).

In places where the groomers were a bit icy, I hopped into the moguls. If there was decent coverage on the steep groomers, I cruised on those and worked on rolling my downhill knee into the hill to dig my edges in cleanly. The area around the Lauberhorn was what I had been looking for all week in terms of terrain. I thought a lot of the other parts of the Jungfrau region weren't very challenging. A little bit of black diamond terrain at the top of the hill with long intermediate and easy runs down to the chair. The Lauberhorn and surrounding chairs above Wengen were much more of what I was looking for. I did laps on groomers there all day.

Here's a shot from the top of the Lauberhorn course - it got hairier as it progressed

Looking down into Wengen towards the bottom of the course

Here's a video from the race that took place a few days later:

At the top of the Mannlichen - I 'skied to the bottom' without stopping on my second day

It's not 'Florence', it's Firenze

I skipped over Florence in my blog updates after the fun I had on my first day in Switzerland, so I’ll talk a little about it now.

The weather was pretty poor the whole time; it rained throughout my visit. Luckily, most of the things I had planned were indoors. I went to the Uffizi gallery, the Bargello, and the Accademia; climbed to the top of the Duomo (which was half a block from my hostel); and visited Piazza della Signoria and the Ponte Vecchio. It’s a beautiful city with a lot of character – I’ll have to go back and see more of it. I can tell there was a lot of history I missed this first time around. I would think it comes into its own with better weather, too. Since so much of the typical sightseeing in Florence is centered on galleries and museums, going in the low season means short lines. I went to the Uffizi and the Accademia in the same day (without a reservation at the Uffizi). It seems like all the guidebooks suggest this would be impossible in summer.

I don’t have many photos from Florence since the museums don’t allow photos. It’ll always be easy to look up the art with an image search, though. Here are some from outside the museums: