The Ballet

A beautiful spring evening, if not confused with summer. A great friend. A magnificent venue. A wonderfully splendid ballet performance. It was a favourite night gone down in the London history book.


Royal Opera House


Stairway to the stalls


Awesome seats














Intermission

UK Driving Licence

We call it driver's license, they call it driving licence. Tomayto, tomahto. Not exactly. It's more than a slight difference in word choice and spelling. That's truly where the real differences only just begin. Because in no way is getting your UK driving licence anything comparable to getting one in the US. Whether you compare time spent in study and preparation, expenses involved or the scary pass rates, the quest for a driving licence in the UK is far more brutal on every count.

The law requires you to obtain a driving licence within one year of taking residence in the UK. If you're keeping track, that means I drove illegally for a full year in 2009/2010. Sadly I know a lot of expats in London who have been in the UK longer than that who have avoided getting a driving licence. After hearing a few ugly stories about such people upon our return last summer, I vowed to get legal and get my licence. And for the record my clock started over when we arrived last August.


First one must fill out one of these rather simple applications to receive a provisional driving licence, a licence that basically means nothing more than you're officially on the driving licence quest. Then you slip it inside a small brown flimsy envelope with your passport, slap a stamp on it and drop it in any post box to send it off to the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA) in Swansea, Wales. Anything about that set of instructions alarming anyone? Yeah, that's right your passport goes in a thin brown envelope and is at the mercy of the Royal Mail and all the well-paid DVLA handlers to make it there and back. And you're without it for two weeks, which is an unsettling feeling when you're living abroad. Once that step is complete and you've got your provisional licence in hand (and your passport back!) you are 1% of the way to achieving your UK driving licence!


Next you book your theory exam online. This is a two-part exam, and failure of either results in an overall fail. The first part is a 50-question multiple choice test, sounds easy enough. But studying can be a time consuming process. First you need to read and study the UK's Highway Code. Not such a big deal, but when you consider that even after 20 years of driving I found much of the material full of new information, rules and expectations that I needed to learn. You begin to see how culturally grounded driving is. In order to pass the multiple choice section, however, you really have to study up on the practise questions. And there are hundreds published. I spent hours and hours reviewing the practise questions, both in the book itself and on iPhone apps. There is no way I'd have passed if I had not studied all I did.


The crazy thing is, this could actually happen to you here.

The other part of the theory exam is the hazard perception test, which is the most ridiculous thing ever, and also very easy to fail. I know a good many people here who failed the theory exam because they failed the hazard perception section. Basically you're shown a series of 14 video clips in which there are hazards, and you must click the computer mouse when you see one. You score a range of 1-5 per hazard based on the timing of your clicks. Sounds easy enough, right? Wrong. What you don't know initially is that each video potentially contains several hazards, but you have to understand what type of hazard they are testing for AND you must click at the exact right moments. And over clicking yields a zero, so no way to cheat your way through. I failed the first few practise rounds on our study CD that we purchased. It took a lot of practise and even comparing strategies with others who have gone before to get it just right.


So passing the theory exam on my first try felt like a major accomplishment in and of itself!

Then begins the hard part, the practical driving test. Jump this last and most difficult hurdle and you officially have your UK licence! You can't register for your test time until you've passed your theory exam. So after allowing myself a couple days for a celebratory lull in my licence quest, I got online and reluctantly booked my slot for 6 March. When I began this process last fall my goal was to have my licence by 1 April. The practical driving test is the part of the process that I have the most difficult time adequately putting into words. Let's just say passing on your first time is not only uncommon, but also not expected. Most expats that I know that have a licence here had to take it two or three times (or more!). In fact there is a joke around here that when introducing yourself you say your name along with how many times it took you to pass the driving test! The precision driving that is expected on the test is beyond over-the-top. They are watching for a million tiny things as you drive during your 40-minute test route, many things that normal British drivers don't even do during everyday driving. The system is very old-school and resistant to change, so you just have to learn these zillion things they are watching for on top of a new set of traffic rules to jump through this hoop. You're allowed a few minor slips, but one major slip or a repeated minor slip will result in a fail. And what was in my mind defined as a minor slip I learned was most likely considered a major slip here, so I had to completely overhaul my thinking on this to understand exactly what they were looking for. And even though I had been driving for 20 years there is no way I could have passed the practical test without expensive lessons from a reputable instructor. I was amazed at how many things I had to focus on, and not only the ridiculous level of detail they are scrutinising on the test, but just how different these things were from driving in the US even though simply put we are all after the same thing, driving from A to B in safety. For instance when at a traffic light you must apply your handbrake and do so without the clicking sound if you are stopped for longer than about 15 seconds keeping your hand on the handbrake until you release it to proceed as the light turns green. Just one example of so many little things. I also need to point out that your licence is transmission specific, you test for an auto or a manual. Even though I drove a manual in the states for over 7 years, I did not feel like I could pass the test here. So my automatic licence means I am not allowed to drive a manual transmission here. But my car is automatic, and so honestly, I don't care because . . . I passed!


And on my first try too! When I got home I collapsed in joy and then literally did a happy dance all over the house!  With this complete, I feel somehow British now. It's like some kind of rite of passage. And the great thing is . . . it never expires!

Modern Art

I consider myself a relatively art savvy person. Not a connoisseur per se, but I know enough about art, studied the great masters and have seen my fair share of the world's most impressive (and even lesser known) art museums. I'm also pretty open minded about most things, art included. I can appreciate works from all genres and all eras. I love that in London most museums are free (well, free as in I bought my tickets, and possibly yours, with my taxes :), so you can pop into any museum and spend an hour or two without feeling obligated to stay an entire day.



So while near St. Paul's a few weeks ago I popped into Tate Modern (pictured above), one of two Tate galleries in London. It is housed in a former power station, which I think is so perfectly suited for a museum, but especially a modern art museum. The large, industrial, boxy space really is the perfect home for the modern arts. Plus I also love it when old, defunct buildings are resurrected to not only preserve the history of the structure, but also to serve a new purpose. Win win. And poetically the power station is really a work of modern art itself.

There is an amazing collection in the permanent galleries as well as a steady flow of rotating temporary exhibits. Some are amazing, intriguing and even inspiring, but others are a brow-furrowing, head-scratching, eye-rolling experience. And on this last visit I found myself experiencing a whole range of reactions. On the whole this visit left a tired brow, a sore head and dizzy eyes.
I can certainly appreciate this . . .



And this is brilliant . . .



This is interesting . . .



Something I like about this. It's not amazing and I'm sort of on the fence about its position here, but I like it so I'm open to it . . .



And to be fair I could allocate much more of this post to more noteworthy works as these, and I wouldn't discourage a visit here. However, I find myself so astonished as to why some of this other stuff is not only considered "art," but that it's also housed in London's Tate Modern, the single most-visited modern art museum in the world. Astonished! So along with all the brow-furrowing, head-scratching and eye-rolling I found myself repeating over and over . . . "Really, this is art?"


Hmmm? A bunch of heating ducts hanging from a ceiling? I guess this could be someone's idea of a beautiful sculpture, but I'm failing to see anything beyond a suspended heap of twisted metal, nor do I see the deep message contained within. What does this say to me? Trip (back) to the junkyard.


Well, what do we have here? A bunch of rocks mounted in boxes with wire rods. Hmmm, maybe if I repeat it again . . . a bunch of rocks mounted in boxes with wire rods. Nope still don't get it.


"Please do not cross the line" or you will mess up our giant tinker toys occupying a large space in the most visited modern art museum in the world.


Oh boy, things just get even more ridiculous. This "piece" is called "untitled." Obviously, because what else do you entitle a mess of black whatevers slumped against a wall? The description beside this piece tells us the artist "began to purchase rectangular sheets of industrial felt and cut into them with a series of straight lines. When suspended, the strips of felt would tumble from their own weight. Morris wanted to question the fixed geometric shapes of Minimalist sculpture and the way Minimalism imposed order on materials. As he wrote in his essay ‘Anti-Form’, the alternative was to let materials determine their own shape. This meant relinquishing control of the final appearance: each time this work is displayed, its precise arrangement will change." Wow, so basically this is much like unfolded laundry? Left "tumble[d] from their own weight" it's a giant heap of messy clothes? So when my kids don't want to tidy their rooms they're really saying they're "let[ting] materials determine their own shape . . . relinquishing control of the final appearance?" That is seriously a powerful mess of black whatevers slumped against the wall.


What have we here? A giant grey blob in a corner (cousin to the mess of black whatevers above; do you see the family resemblance?). Moving stuff. The plaque in the museum notes "The bottom and two flat sides are effectively a cast of the floor and walls, while the slumps on the front result from the unpredictable behaviour of waves of slowly solidifying foam." Get out?! Pretty much just like the glue bottle left tipped over with the lid loose I found on the desk the other day. Even with open corners to fill in this museum, I just don't get how this gets a spot. My glue bottle debacle is way cooler than this!


Yep, a giant sheet of latex coated with red painted sawdust. What am I missing here?! Oh, yeah, nothing.


Can you spot the art? No really, it's there! I promise you! Can't you see that beautiful white octagonal paper on the wall? A-mazing! "Tuttle’s Paper Octagonals are paper shapes that he cut from a template and glued to the wall. The orientation of the shape can vary from one installation to the next." Oh, so turning the plain white octagon and changing its orientation from time to time is the key? So next time I go, if the big pointed part facing downward is facing left or right, or even upward it's really going to knock my socks off!? My breath is baited! "Tuttle intends that the octagon should disappear into the wall as much as possible." So it's non-existent art? Now we're talking! "Nonetheless, once noticed, the work becomes strangely present." Yes, as in strangely how on earth is this present on the wall in London's Tate Modern?! "As an object it is ultra-thin, but it still takes up an awkward place between painting and sculpture." Ah yes, definitely that "awkward place" alright! That awkward place between my five year-old's hands and a pair of scissors.

Good grief, this stuff just crosses the line! A total load of rubbish all masquerading as art.

The Wizarding World of Harry Potter

I'm just going to cut to the chase here. Overall we were really disappointed by The Wizarding World of Harry Potter. Firstly if you go, you should know that this is not a theme park unto its own. It is only one small part, or "land" if you're a Disneyphile, of a theme park with many other sections. It is in one of Universal Orlando's theme parks called Universal Islands of Adventures, and probably only makes up about 15% of the whole park at best.



Lest you think we just had misinformed expectations that led to our disappointment, we did actually know this before we went. Although it wasn't until our research for this trip that we discovered this, and I personally think that Universal has intentionally led people to believe that the Harry Potter "park" is if not its own or at least much bigger and more of an attraction than it really is. The Wizarding World of Harry Potter? Come on, try the Wizarding Corner of Harry Potter, or The Wizarding Alley, but World!? I think not! Check out the map here and see for yourself . . .



While it comprises of only about 15% of the park, unfortunately I'd say 85% of park visitors were crammed into the Harry Potter-themed section. It was heel to toe throughout; claustrophobics need not enter! They severely underestimated the Harry Potter fan base, which I think was a pretty bone-headed move. It doesn't take a Wharton Business School grad to make accurate projections on the droves of people that will flock to anything labeled "Harry Potter." Duh. Projections for Harry Potter theme park crowds: the inhabitants of the earth.



Additionally the Hogsmede themed Harry Potter-land is largely devoted to commercial activity. Shop after shop. Of course you expect, and even want, to shop for a wand at Ollivander's, and try sweets at Honeydukes and check out what's got everyone laughing at George and Fred's joke shop, BUT it went way beyond that to the point that I really just felt like we were at Pottermart. Only the prices were outrageous! You expect theme park prices to be high, but these were over the top.



If you were lucky (or unlucky enough) to squeeze into Ollivander's, you'd find replica wands for each character for the bargain price of $30. Smashed against a shelf full of wands I kept hearing over and over from wand shoppers "oh, wow, that's way too much for a wand" usually followed by something like "this is ridiculous, let's get out of here." Which leads me to an important point. I think there is a way you can get people to feel okay, even happy, paying an upwards of $30 for a wand. We kept noting throughout the day how different this place felt from Disney. You enter a Disney park and even though your wallet is wide open and money is flying out at a rate that might cause to you take out a second mortgage, you're smiling the entire time. There is a certain magic that Disney has engineered that gets you to such a happy place once you've crossed the turnstiles that you aren't really even aware of the vast amounts of money you are dropping. One could write a dissertation on this topic. And I believe Disney has this down to a science to such an extent that after our day in Harry Potter, we found ourselves repeating over and over what a "great value for money" the Disney experience really is. So the point is that it is conceivable that you could get me happy about paying $30 for a wand, but Universal's poor execution of Harry Potter "World" falls short. So ironic that this place would be sorely lacking in, well, magic.










$15 for one chocolate frog?!







$13 for a tiny box of Every Flavour Beans






The size of the place is not only an issue, but also the scope. After our visit we sat at lunch and reviewed our experience. Our discussion nearly turned to a business meeting on how to successfully revamp Harry Potter "World." Ideas included, handing the keys to Disney and letting them draw up an entire theme park dedicated only to Harry Potter, an actual owlery with real (not stuffed as in the above) owls, magic shows on stage with special effects highlighting some of the book's coolest spells, character meet and greets where you could actually meet Dumbledore and Hagrid, a real train ride on the Hogwarts Express that might even include intruding dementors, a sorting hat experience, and really the ideas go on and on. So much potential. JK Rowling did the hard part already, folks!






The positives? I know this is a harsh review in all, but there were some good things. Overall the structures built to create Hogsmede and that simulated Diagon Alley were pretty good. And the castle itself was pretty stunning.


The best part? Definitely the Butterbeer! We weren't expecting to like it, but it was delish!


So there you have it! Even though we are huge Harry Potter fans, I can't recommend a trip here. Perhaps had it been a little less crowded, we'd have enjoyed it more. But even then it's not extensive enough to warrant the trip. We were done in under two hours. And really it's just missing that certain je ne sais quoi, that magic. Forget Florida, come to London and experience the real thing!