December 26th, 2006

Thinking about small states

So I've been visiting Vermont, New Hampshire and Maine the last few days and their lack of population got me thinking.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not going to talk about the fact that each of 3 states I've been visiting have populations smaller than Dallas but have 2 senators each. I get the fact that it means that small states won't be ignored.

I do think it means is that people in big states are going to forget how lucky they are, however. Manchester, NH has one good art gallery, but only a population of about 105,000. Portland, ME has a population of 68,000 and a so-so art gallery. Fort Worth, TX, in comparison, has two good galleries, and one so-so gallery. This probably isn't surprising if you think about it, but when you visit the place from a "true big city," you're inclined to think that the population is hard done by.

I guess I might have enjoyed visiting here more if I was the "nature type," but I'm not so it's been a bit of a bummer so far.

Some stupid facts I learned

Other than the usual new experiences that you have when you travel, I've learned a couple of new things since I got here (either that or I just had a couple of illusions smashed). First they don't pronounce the capital of New Hampshire (Concord) the same way they pronounce the airplane. Instead it sounds more like a mixture of conquered and concurred when they say it.

Secondly, I always assumed the capital of Vermont was Burlington (probably because it was the only city I'd heard of from Vermont). It's not. It's Montpelier. I guess you pick that sort of stuff up when you're a native, but when you're not it's the basics you often miss out on.