LAist: Is the San Fernando Valley not Los Angeles?

Scott

Fri, 17 Feb 2006 21:07:09 -0800

Just as an exercise in, well, I guess futility, this is how I see things... There are levels. At the top level you have the city... for example, Los Angeles, or New York City. Next level down is I guess a 'borough' or 'region'. So, in L.A., that'd be East L.A., West L.A., Central L.A. South Bay, and The Valley; in New York, you've got the Bronx, Queens, etc. Then, you've got the community... Granada Hills, Westwood, San Pedro, Silverlake, Van Nuys, Venice, etc.; in New York, West Village, Gramercy, Upper Westside, Flatbush, Astoria, Flushing, and so on. Just thought I'd post that observation.

Scott Mercer

Thu, 16 Feb 2006 22:24:42 -0800

But, New Jersey IS part of New York City. (Culturally, if not governmentally.) If people ask where I grew up, I say "New York," even though I grew up in suburbia in New Jersey (though I've been to New York more times than I can count; my mother and father were both from The Bronx). When they say "what part of New York?" I say "New Jersey." This pisses off some people more than you could possibly imagine. But I watched New York City TV stations, listened to New York City radio stations, and shopped at New-York based (or New-Jersey based) supermarkets my whole life growing up. (We get the local newspaper though.) In this same way, the Valley is part of L.A. Hell, some of the TV stations here even broadcast out of the Valley, (Glendale channel 7, and Burbank for channel 4) and they i.d. as "Los Angeles." However, having lived in both L.A. and the Valley, I have to say, that The Valley, more than any other region I can think of, has its own distinct, historical and cultural identity. More than any other part of any other city in the United States. It's the geographical separation that does it. So, the Valley: Not really separate as far as government. Really separate as far as culture and history. It is this dissonance that causes all the uproar and threats of secession.

Coco

Thu, 16 Feb 2006 16:47:03 -0800

One of the reasons I chose Van Nuys (the neighborhood) over Burbank (the city) when I bought a house is because the guy I used to live with insisted we have an address where he could vote for mayor of (the city of) Los Angeles. Therefore I live in the Valley, and at the same time I live in Los Angeles. Can folks please find something else to worry about?

Darrin

Thu, 16 Feb 2006 16:07:36 -0800

Is an overcoat a part of a wardrobe or is it separate from it? Are you sure of what you mean when you say "wardrobe"? Is everyone you're speaking to just as sure? If you're wearing the coat, is it still a part of the wardrobe or is it now a part of your outfit? Is any of this worth defining for purposes other than semantic ones?

DP

Thu, 16 Feb 2006 12:56:13 -0800

Here's the latest Valley Observed posting: "Reader Carole sent along some family photos of the annual Northridge Stampede parade..." Sorry, but I wouldn't want to read such a posting on LA Observed, which is likely why Valley Observed is a separate website. If he starts posting about lemonade stands in Mar Vista he could launch My Backyard Observed. Then we can argue about whether his backyard is in LA -- oh, wait that already happened as well...

Glen B.

Thu, 16 Feb 2006 10:13:30 -0800

Some handy maps for combatting geographic confusion from Los Angeles Almanac:Communities of the City of Los AngelesOther Cities in Los Angeles CountyUnincorporated Areas of Los Angeles County

Glen B.

Thu, 16 Feb 2006 09:59:24 -0800

Actually, Orange County is a separate county, which includes quite a few other separate cities. My bad.That's what I get for posting before I've had my coffee. :-)

Glen B.

Thu, 16 Feb 2006 09:54:28 -0800

Well, Orange County, Santa Monica, Beverly Hills, Long Beach, West Hollywood, and Pasadena aren't part of Los Angeles. They're separate cities.Sure, they're in the same area as LA, (i.e., the "Greater Los Angeles Area"), but that doesn't make them part of LA, any more than being in the same area makes New Jersey part of New York City.Hollywood, the Valley, and Venice, on the other hand, are part of Los Angeles, no matter what the geographically confused may think. If Manhattanites were to insist that Brooklyn and the Bronx "aren't really part of New York City", they'd be wrong, too. :-)J-Po, if it's any comfort, there are some Angelenos who don't see why anyone bothers to distinguish between Kentucky and, say, Tennessee, Arkansas, or Missouri. If it's not on the coast, it's 'flyover country', and not worth worrying over trivial distinctions like state boundaries. :-)"It all looks the same to someone from outside" isn't really a reliable yardstick. :-)

J-Po

Wed, 15 Feb 2006 23:28:49 -0800

I moved here from Kentucky about 5-6 years ago. It astounded me that people make so many distinctions about what is and isn't part of LA (I have heard at different points that the Valley, the OC, Santa Monica, Beverly Hills, Long Beach, Venice, Hollywood, West Hollywood, Pasadena, etc. are all "not part of LA"). Just a note that almost nobody east of here makes any distinction about it. My rule of thumb is if you are driving around, and there are still buildings around you, you're still in LA. Of course, by that logic, San Diego is practically part of LA, but hey, whatever... :) I like thinking of LA as a place so immensely huge that you cannot see all of it by standing at any one point on earth, if merely for the fact of the earth's curvature.

LACN

Wed, 15 Feb 2006 23:17:44 -0800

The Valley is part of the City - almost half of it, in fact. You can focus on the Valley without including all of the City, but you can't focus on all of the City without including the Valley. It's the whole "not all parrallelograms are squares but all squares are parrallelograms" logic. They're intimately linked, and one part would not do well without the other.

LACN

Wed, 15 Feb 2006 23:17:19 -0800

oliver

Wed, 15 Feb 2006 19:52:03 -0800

Los Angeles does indeed have its own regions—West LA, Mid-City, Hollywood, East LA and Downtown to name a few. However, I wouldn't really consider the Valley to be one of these regions. The Valley has its own regions—Burbank, Glendale, Van Nuys, etc. Yes, the Valley and LA are linked and yes, it is sometimes helpful to think of them as part of a single, sprawling megalopolis. And technically, much of the Valley lies within the Los Angeles city limits. But the Valley is not Los Angeles.

Glen B.

Wed, 15 Feb 2006 19:48:47 -0800

Carolyn, you're right. The Valley is part of LA. (Well, most of it, anyway - some parts of it are part of Burbank, Glendale, Universal City, San Fernando, or Calabasas, instead.)I'd also note in passing that the San Fernando Valley was part of LA before Mar Vista was.Of course, given that he's written a book on the history of the San Fernando Valley (and a very nice book it is, too!), I expect that Kevin Roderick is already aware of this. :-)

Scott

Wed, 15 Feb 2006 19:35:32 -0800

I'm from the Valley, therfore, I am from Los Angeles. Period. Yes, there are issues and cultures that are specific to the Valley, but the same can be said of any region of Los Angeles (East L.A. specific issues, West L.A. specific issues, South Bay specific issues). It's like New York City --- Bronx, Brooklyn, Queens, and even Staten Island are all part of NYC; not just Manhattan --- and each part has its own distinct flavor. True, the Valley's flavor may be bland (I disagree) but it's a unique part of the City of L.A. Go Valley!

Rachel Cohen

Wed, 15 Feb 2006 17:05:56 -0800

Since Carolyn is still in college and is about 20 or 21, and she's not buying a house or making a hellacious move to get her kid into a decent public school, let's forgive her for being oblivious to the Valley/LA fracas. And having a blog for a book--well, everyone here shoudl be so lucky, right?

Carolyn

Wed, 15 Feb 2006 16:37:15 -0800

Rodger, I was born in Tallahassee, Florida, where I lived until I was three. My life is an open book. I'm not sure why you ask, but I hope that this sharing has brought us closer together.

Rodger Jacobs

Wed, 15 Feb 2006 16:06:59 -0800

Let me rephrase the question, Carolyn, to it's original intent: Are you an L.A. native? "Geographically confused baseball owner" -- good one, Mike.

Mike Randall

Wed, 15 Feb 2006 15:55:08 -0800

This looks like a reminder of the Valley Succesion movement. But then again I swear there are still people who say that Orange County is not part of Los Angeles, but then again we do have a geographically confused baseball owner.

Carolyn

Wed, 15 Feb 2006 15:49:04 -0800

Rodger, you're right. I take pictures of Koreatown via satellite from my secret lair in Antarctica.

dnero

Wed, 15 Feb 2006 15:39:38 -0800

I meant "heading west" instead of "heading east."

dnero

Wed, 15 Feb 2006 15:35:36 -0800

According to many of his posts, Kevin lives in Mar Vista, which is in the city of Los Angeles, and, indeed, near Santa Monica Airport. Yes, you can live in the city of Los Angeles and live near Santa Monica Airport. Three sides of the airport, in fact, border the city of Los Angeles, and, on any sunny day, you can see small aircraft heading east over the Wilshire corridor and into West Los Angeles en route to the ... Santa Monica Airport. Planes take off over ... Venice, which, last time I checked, was in the ... yes ... city of Los Angeles. Carolyn, sorry to say, but for an L.A. blogger, this post seems a bit uninformed. Get with it.

Rodger Jacobs

Wed, 15 Feb 2006 15:34:44 -0800

You're not from these parts are ya, Carolyn? And there's nothing wrong with opening a site to promote a book. That's exactly what I did when I introduced 8763 Wonderland in July of last year and it has evolved quite nicely, thank you, into a boutique site with between 750 and 900 unique visitors per day. And my book does move quite well but that's not the primary purpose of the site.

Gregg Fuller

Wed, 15 Feb 2006 13:12:14 -0800

The Valley may have it's own identity different than that of the City-proper, but it's all part of the city. When I travel and people ask me where I'm from, I say Los Angeles. The valley is los angeles, just a different part.

Douglas E. Welch

Wed, 15 Feb 2006 13:09:32 -0800

As an outsider who has now lived here for nearly 20 years, all of it in The Valley, I think that the Valley is, indeed, no part of Los Angeles. Treated as the adopted step-sister by both parents and siblings, the Valley is no more part of LA than Irvine. The Santa Monica Mountains are a natural division that no amount of governmental will can overcome.

oliver

Wed, 15 Feb 2006 13:07:08 -0800

Sorry, forgot the link for those quotes: http://www.laobserved.com/archive/2006/02/we_all_agree_on_the_date.html

oliver

Wed, 15 Feb 2006 13:05:45 -0800

No! It's not Los Angles, it's the Valley. The Valley has its own issues, culture, news, history, etc. While I'll admit that sometimes it makes sense to consider the Valley as part of Los Angeles, other times it makes more sense to view them as counterparts. There are enough of these other time to justify a separate site. Regarding the new site Roderick calls it, "the new incarnation of my website about the San Fernando Valley." He continues: "It went online in 2002 as a companion site to my book, with pages on history and lore, the Valley's mixed image and even a compilation of quips and jokes. This week I reloaded the pages into a blog format, which means everything is now searchable and I can update more easily. Valley lore is still the focus, but I'll also be posting some news and culture items and observing the rising number of blogs that emanate over the hill from the rest of Los Angeles. Consider it the first cousin of LA Observed--the first addition to a growing family."