Reflections on semester one

I write this post in Seattle airport as I await my long journey home for Christmas after spending six great days in Washington. As I sit here, I am able to reflect sufficiently upon the past four months I have spent in the United States. There have been definite highs but similarly, there have been lows. I am unable to put everything in words but here are a few things that have stood out for me.

If I am being honest, I am disappointed with UT’s Geography department and it has indeed made me realise how great the department is at UCL. I took three geography classes this semester, in addition to a gender studies class. I felt as if all my classes expected very little of you: the required readings often only repeated what was taught in class, whilst the class content was relatively easy. 

Furthermore, the semester was a total of sixteen weeks (nearly double that of UCL’s) but I did not feel as if I learnt a greater amount that I would normally at UCL. Instead, ideas and concepts were taught more slowly and often, the material became repetitive and boring by the end of the semester.

Exams were not essay based and instead short answer. Therefore, I felt as if I was unable to properly engage in the subject or exercise critical thinking. It sometimes very much felt like school again. Additionally, I read very few academic articles, which was especially disappointing for the class I took about the Anthropocene when it is such a pioneering topic within academic journals. Instead we read non-fiction books that seemed to be aimed for an audience with little environmental science knowledge, which I found dull and slightly patronising.

However, everyone knows that a year abroad is not just about academia; I am hugely thankful for this opportunity and as time goes on, I become even more appreciative. I’ve met so many new people and made friends from different countries and continents. I’ve seen places that I never thought I would see and I’m experiencing a culture that, regardless of the common language, is so very different to that of the UK’s. I have been able to experience Thanksgiving (which basically feels just like a Christmas dinner without the decorations and presents) with family in Wisconsin, witnessed the shock of the presidential election and been part of the disappointed mass, and saw my favourite band whose tour coincidentally came to Texas.

I’ve been incredibly impressed with the university’s facilities: many buildings on the campus are modern builds and have great open spaces to work in, there are multiple cafes, and even specific places to nap. However, the sports facilities are probably the best in my opinion; there are three gyms on campus, an indoor running track, several squash courts, a climbing wall, two pools and even a hot tub, all in addition to renovated sports fields and tennis courts north of campus. I am currently on the women’s Ultimate Frisbee team, Melee, and therefore I am profusely thankful for the gym and fields, especially as UCL’s facilities in this area are arguably very dire in comparison. We practice as a team three times a week in addition to working out/throwing twice a week; we are able to do this due to the facilities that UT provides. I am probably the fittest I’ve been regardless of the amount of American junk food I’ve been eating.

I could write so much more about the experiences and differences I have encountered but I’ll save that for May. However, I would like to include that I have found vegetarian and vegan food in Texas and consequently, I am still sufficiently nourished…  I didn’t know what this first semester would bring but I can now certainly confirm that I do indeed have a soft spot for Austin. I look forward to returning in January and seeing what the remaining four months will bring.  

Finishing the semester in Seattle

Sustainability on the UT Campus

As time goes on, I continue to learn more and more about UT Austin; some discoveries are positive, and some are negative. However, all are interesting. One such discovery was my visit to the Living Wall with my landscape ecology class; we were assessing how urban areas can attempt to provide new solutions to environmental problems and help meet conservation goals. The Living Wall is the name given to the steel wall that contains a variety of freshly planted native vegetation within a honeycomb structure. The wall consists of 148 interchangeable plastic soil containers that support the numerous root systems and consequently provide habitat for a variety of fauna, including lizards, hummingbirds, and butterflies (Lentz, 2016). The wall was constructed in summer 2016 by the School of Architecture in collaboration with the Lady Bird Johnson Wildflower Center to assess the role of architecture in ecology (Lentz, 2016).

In addition to the aesthetic impact, the wall provides numerous environmental benefits. These include: cooling the building, mitigating storm water, reducing noise pollution, increasing air quality through the removal of certain particulate matter, and providing habitat for native species (Texas Architecture, nd). These impacts are especially significant given the wall’s location – parallel to a busy road. The wall has been received positively, hoping that it will help provide data and understanding into campus sustainability; there is hope that the installation will encourage additional constructions of living walls in other locations on campus (Texas Architecture, nd).

The Living Wall

My visit to the Living Wall made me start to think about the other sustainable spaces on the UT campus and the additional ways the university attempts to achieve sustainability. Before I even arrived in Austin, sustainability was on my mind; I knew from researching the university that the institution upheld certain values and goals, including the provision of sustainability-focused learning and research opportunities for all UT students, the construction of green buildings, the reduction of waste, and the maintenance and restoration of native ecosystems (UT Austin, nd). UT adopted a Campus Sustainability Policy in 2008 and established a Department of Sustainability in 2009 that both aim to promote these sustainable goals across the campus (Office of Sustainability, nd). One of the initiatives I am incredibility impressed with is the university’s microfarm: the urban farm is led by passionate students who grow food and provide education on the benefits of locally grown organic produce to university students and those from the surrounding community.

On the surface, UT seems to certainly tick the sustainability box. Therefore, it is perhaps unsurprising that the university is regarded by The Princeton Review (2016) to be one of the 361 most environmentally friendly colleges. However, there is a part of me that does not agree with this. After studying here for almost four months, I have noticed certain unsustainable practices; the amount of waste produced from paper towels due to the absence of hand dryers in the toilets, the excessive air conditioning throughout campus buildings, the lack of recycling bins in certain locations, the abundance of plastic food packaging in campus cafes, and as an environmental vegetarian, the lack of support and education of meatless meals.

These are predominatly little things, which is what I find particularly interesting; they are arguably the easiest practices to pursue, especially in comparison to a steel construction that has taken extensive time, money, and persuasion. Therefore, I question the university’s intentions. Large and decadent sustainability projects attract attention – attention that grabs prospective students who care about the environment or prestigious environmental awards. I’m not arguing that sustainable practices are purely being implemented only for their desirable consequences, including the potential increase of prospective students and academics, but instead that these consequences are one of the reasons why sustainable practices are pursed by a university.

UT is not unique. Sustainability is currently not the number one priority for a university. I wish that perhaps in the future sustainability may gain a greater hold in the agenda but in the meantime, I hope that the data collected from the Living Wall shows the benefits and consequently, the positives of certain sustainable practices on campus (even though I fundamentally just wish UT installed hand dryers into the toilets).

References

Lentz, S.R. (2016) Campus Installs First Living Wall [Online]. Austin: The University of Texas at Austin. Available at: https://news.utexas.edu/2016/06/20/campus-installs-first-living-wall [Accessed 13 December 2016].

Office of Sustainability (nd) History [Online]. Austin: The University of Texas at Austin. Available at: http://operations.utexas.edu/sustainability/about.html [Accessed 13 December 2016].

Texas Architecture (nd) Visit the Living Wall! [Online]. Austin: The University of Texas at Austin. Available at: http://soa.utexas.edu/headlines/utsoa-announces-living-wall-project [Accessed 13 December 2016].

The Princeton Review (2016) 361 Green Colleges [Online]. Natick: The Princeton Review. Available at: https://www.princetonreview.com/college-rankings?rankings=green-colleges [Accessed 13 December 2016].

University of Texas at Austin (nd) Initiatives [Online]. Austin: The University of Texas at Austin. Available at: https://sustainability.utexas.edu/initiatives/ [Accessed 13 December 2016]. 

Austin’s redevelopment and gentrification

As part of my morning ritual, I sleepily look through The Guardian’s must-read stories delivered to me via email. A few weeks ago, one article written by Eva Wiseman really caught my attention: Wiseman highlighted the wording of advertisements of new-build sites and redevelopments in London. She found several reoccurring words, some of which included ‘decanting’, ‘revitalised’, ‘vibrant’, ‘innovation’, ‘fresh’, ‘luxury’ and ‘authentic’. This made me start to think of Austin. As I mentioned in one of my earlier posts, when I moved to Austin I knew very little about the city. However, I have now lived here for almost three months and unsurprisingly within that time, I have noticed a few things.

Austin is experiencing redevelopment. The US Census Bureau has cited Austin as one of the fastest growing cities in the United States (Cohen, 2015). As a current resident of the city, this is very much apparent; one does not have to look far to see a crane, to hear the noise of drilling, and/or to experience consequent traffic from road closures. I have wandered downtown and experienced all of this on the way, but most importantly, I have seen the affluent boutiques on 2^nd Street arguably selling pointless (yet aesthetically pleasing) products; I have drunk in coffee shops that serve ridiculously priced lattes; and I have read newspaper articles that have condemned the increased prices of rent and the displacement of lower income groups (e.g. Rahmen 2016). All this evidence helps point to one conclusion: gentrification is occurring in Austin.

And perhaps most surprising to me is that this gentrification is receiving academic attention (e.g. Lavy et al., 2016). One specific area of controversy is Rainey Street District; the neighbourhood is located north of Colorado River, southeast downtown. Rainey Street neighbourhood traditionally exhibited a mainly Hispanic population (Dase and Ward, 2000). However, due to initiatives of the local authorities and their urban redevelopment policies that enabled the location of profitable and high-density housing in the area, Rainey Street has now become home to entrepreneurial businesses (Lavy et al., 2016). In turn, this has resulted in increased land value and a consequent displacement of the mainly Hispanic and lower income community (Lavy et al., 2016).

I decided to visit Rainey Street myself, specifically keeping in mind the list of words Wiseman (2016) had found and whether I would see these words myself.

I approached Rainey Street from the north and instantly came across a block of apartments named The Millennium. An advertisement in the window boasted of ‘luxury apartments’ and ‘downtown views’; this was similarly the case on their website, where the word luxury was commonly used in addition to ‘dream home’, ‘trendy’ and ‘swanky’. The website even described Rainey Street as ‘vintage bungalow houses that have transformed into quaint, cool backyard bars.’ The Millennium was just one of the high-rise apartments within Rainey Street; SkyHouse Austin and Windsor on the Lake are others which also exhibit similar wording The Millennium used and Wiseman (2016) found.

The Millennium

As I travelled further down Rainey Street, I came across these vintage bungalows The Millennium had so aptly described; they were small and quaint and if I’m being honest, pretty cool. I saw Rainey Street during the day but I can imagine that the atmosphere at night has a certain lively vibe. However, significantly all of these bungalows were either bars or restaurants: there seemed to be no sign of residential bungalows. And as I carried on wandering, it become more apparent that Rainey Street had (and is currently still is) experienced dramatic change. Cranes and construction works were abundant and the area just in general screamed gentrification; quirky and expensive bars, high-rise apartments boasting of luxury living that contain rooftop pools, gourmet kitchens and even ‘granite top bath vanities with custom lighting’, funky food trucks, and well-gardened infrastructure.

One of the bars on Rainey Street

A juxtaposition of two bungalows within the neighbourhood

My friend and I spotted an interestingly shaped building and decided to explore. We soon realised that it was the Mexican American Cultural Center, which I found to be quite ironic. The building is supposedly dedicated to preserving, creating, and promoting the cultural arts of Mexican Americans and Latinos but instead, is now no longer located in a predominately Hispanic community. This building is perhaps the final piece of evidence that confirms Rainey Street District, and thus Austin, has been subject to the hands of gentrification.

Food trucks on Rainey Street

References

Cohen, D.T. (2015) Population trends in incorporated places: 2000 to 2013 – Population estimates and projections. Washington DC: U.S. Census Bureau.

Dase, A.E. and R.B. Ward (2000) The peculiar genius of Rainey Street: A social and architectural history. Austin: Heritage Society of Austin.

Lavy, B., E.D. Dascher and R.R. Hagelman (2016) ‘Media portrayal of gentrification and redevelopment on Rainey Street in Austin, Texas (USA), 2000–2014’, City, Culture and Society, Vol. 7 (4), 197-207.

Rahman, M. (2016) Gentrification worsens Austin’s diversity problem [Online]. Austin: The Daily Texan. Available at: http://www.dailytexanonline.com/2016/08/31/gentrification-worsens-austins-diversity-problem [Accessed 31st August 2016].

Wiseman, E. (2016) Beware the vibrant, emerging, misleading language of gentrification [Online]. London: The Guardian. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2016/oct/09/beware-the-vibrant-emerging-misleading-language-of-gentrification [Accessed 10th October 2016].

9th November: a dark day for the environment

2016 continues to cause political turmoil. Nobody thought that Trump was going to win this presidential race: all but one poll predicted Clinton to be the victor; it was clear she was to break the glass ceiling and become the next president of the United States. However, just like the result of Brexit, 2016 once again proved me wrong.

As I watched the election coverage and the result become increasingly clear, I grew shocked. And now nine hours later, this feeling has not left. I am hugely disappointed and sad. I grieve for those who have been left behind and for those who passionately did not want this outcome.

As a geography student, it was especially disheartening to see climate change continuously cast aside within the election campaign. During the three presidential debates, only five minutes and twenty-seven seconds were spent discussing climate change or other environmental issues. Similarly, no question was asked about climate policy (Merchant, 2016).

Yet climate change is happening now. Over the period 1880 to 2012, there was a 0.85 degrees Celsius warming trend (IPCC, 2014). And according to the IPCC (2014), this surface temperature is projected to rise as we just continue into the twenty-first century, regardless of the emission scenario. Heat waves are likely to become more common and last longer; precipitation events are expected to become more severe and frequent; global mean sea level is expected to rise; and the ocean will become warmer and more acidified.

However, the future president of the United States has failed to accept that this unprecedented warming is happening and instead has claimed that climate change is indeed a ‘hoax’. On Trump’s website, none of his policies mention or address climate change mitigation. Trump has caused global fear, suggesting he will undo Barack Obama’s ambitious environmental progress. He has claimed that he will scrap the Clean Power Act and repeal all federal spending on clean energy, and has hinted that he wants to get rid of the US Environmental Protection Agency, asserting that ‘they are a disgrace’ (Pulmer, 2016). Furthermore, Trump has plans to ‘cancel the Paris climate agreement and stop all payments of US tax dollars to UN global warming programmes’ (Whyte, 2016).

We are currently living in a pivotal moment. Carbon dioxide levels have now surpassed 400ppm for the first time in recorded history (NASA, 2013) whilst 2016 has officially been the warmest year on record (NASA, 2016): we must act now or pay for the consequences. The UN Paris Agreement has given a little bit of hope, exerting diplomatic pressure on countries to increase their mitigation action. There are indeed some serious flaws with the deal but it is a welcomed start. It offers potential momentum.

So now I also grieve for the environment.

The USA is currently the second largest emitter of carbon dioxide (Boden et al. 2015). If the US successfully decreased its carbon footprint, it would be revolutionary for the planet. The US has the chance to become a role model to the rest of the world, a pioneer in renewable energy, a leader in climate policy. But instead, the US may plunge backwards; if we take Trump for his word, his victory is an environmental disaster. This is dangerous. This is scary. This is real.

References

Boden, T.A., Marland, G., and Andres, R.J. (2015). National CO2 Emissions from Fossil-Fuel Burning, Cement Manufacture, and Gas Flaring. Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center, Oak Ridge: National Laboratory, U.S. Department of Energy

IPCC (2014) Climate Change 2014 Synthesis Report Summary for Policymakers. Geneva: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

Merchant, E.F. (2016) Climate change enjoyed its 2 seconds of fame in the final debate [Online]. Seattle: Grist. Available at: http://grist.org/election-2016/climate-airtime-presidential-debate/ [Accessed 9 November 2016].

NASA (2013) For first time, Earth's single-day CO2 tops 400 ppm [Online]. Washington D.C.: NASA. Available at: http://climate.nasa.gov/news/916/for-first-time-earths-single-day-co2-tops-400-ppm/ [Accessed 9 November 2016].

NASA (2016) 2016 Climate Trends Continue to Break Records [Online]. Washington D.C.: NASA. Available at: http://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2016/climate-trends-continue-to-break-records [Accessed 9 November 2016].

Pulmer, B. (2016) There’s no way around it: Donald Trump is going to be a disaster for the planet [Online]. New York: Vox. Available at: http://www.vox.com/2016/11/9/13571318/donald-trump-disaster-climate [Accessed 9 November 2016].

Whyte, L. (2016) Donald Trump vows to pull US out of Paris climate agreement if he is elected [Online]. New York: International Business Times. Available at: http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/donald-trump-vows-pull-us-out-paris-climate-agreement-if-he-elected-1562350 [Accessed 9 November 2016]. 

Gardens: an alternative feature of the Anthropocene

Yesterday afternoon, my whole concept of gardens changed. That was probably a weird sentence to read but once I explain, you shall hopefully understand…

I am currently taking a class called ‘The Anthropocene’; the main aim of the class is to evaluate the cumulative effects of humans on Earth in order for us to eventually individually conclude whether the Earth has indeed left the Holocene and entered a new geological epoch - the Anthropocene. The term Anthropocene was first proposed by Crutzen and Stoermer (2000), who argued that humans have displaced nature by becoming a dominant environmental force on Earth. It is easy to see how humans have dramatically altered the planet; we merely just have to look out the window to see for example how humans have altered land use through urbanisation. Consequently, there is an abundance of academic literature that has evidenced these human effects, through the extinction of megafauna (Barnosky et al., 2004) to the domestication of the world’s crops and livestock (Larson et al., 2014), mass deforestation, and the burning of fossil fuels (Kaplan et al., 2011).

Similarly, studies have looked at how human activities have modified Earth’s natural biome vegetation, consequently creating ‘anthromes’ (Ellis, 2011). I personally tended to think of these ‘anthromes’ as urban settlements, agricultural land, and disturbed forested and vegetated land. I would never place gardens within this subset. However, as my professor began to discuss how humans have developed gardens, disturbing the natural environment through deliberately modifying vegetation whilst simultaneously introducing non-native plant species, it suddenly dawned on me: gardens are another prime example of how humans have impacted the Earth. Even though gardens are associated with containing ‘nature’, they are very much unnatural. Gardens change the composition and configuration of the natural landscape through the introduction of non-native species and unnatural flower combination and patterns, the implementation of man-made borders, and the artificial upkeep of plants, such as neat hedgerows and flower beds.

Without this human alteration, the natural landscape of a garden would obviously be very different. This demonstrates how we have the ability to transform a natural environment. I think that a garden represents our unearthly power and dominance over nature.

This discussion made me think of my visit to Zilker Botanical Garden a few weeks ago. The Austin garden displays a range of native, non-native and exotic plants in which approximately 300,000 people visit annually (Zilker Botanical Garden, nd). I remember thinking that the garden was peaceful and natural – a nice escape from downtown Austin and the urban landscape that humans have very much created. However, on the other hand, I cannot help but think how the garden’s landscape is not natural and has also experienced a variety of human modifications: within the Japanese Garden, there are a number of Japanese maple trees in addition to unnatural, yet pleasant looking, rockery and flower installations. Without human intervention and consequent power and dominance over nature, this garden landscape would not exist.

The Japanese Garden in Zilker Botanical Garden

Within the garden, there are a number of personalised paving stones. One of which really caught my attention: it read ‘deep within each of us lies a garden’. At the time, I thought this meant there is a place within us that is harmonious; a gentle and serene characteristic present beneath our exterior. However, I now have a very different, and arguably much more negative, perception. I think that if a garden can fundamentally represent human power and dominance over nature, the claim that ‘deep within each of us lies a garden’ therefore means that we have within us the ability to transform nature – it is an innate trait within our species, which has the capability to transform the Earth as we formally begin to enter the Anthropocene.

This is arguably a very morbid way to view an innocent garden. I may now never be able to experience a garden the same way. I apologise if I have now done the same to you.

One of the personalised paving stones in the garden

References

Barnosky, P.L., R.S. Koch, R.S. Feranec, S.L. Wing and A.B. Shabel (2004) ‘Assessing the Causes of Late Pleistocene Extinctions on the Continents’, Science, Vol. 306, 70-75.

Crutzen, P.J. and E.F. Stoermer (2000) ‘The “Anthropocene”, Global Change’, IGBP Newsletter, Vol. 41 (12), 17-18.

Ellis, E.C. (2011) ‘Anthropogenic transformation of the terrestrial biosphere’, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A, Vol. 369, 1010-1035.

Kaplan, J.O. et al (2011) ‘Holocene carbon emissions as a result of anthropogenic land cover change’, Holocene, Vol. 21, 775-791.

Larson, G. et al (2014) ‘Current perspectives and the future of domestication studies’, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Vol. 111, 6139-6146.

Zilker Botanical Garden (nd) The Gardens of ZBG [Online]. Austin: Zilker Botanical Gardens. Available at http://www.zilkergarden.org/gardens/gardens.html [Accessed: 19^th October 2016]. 

The end of gun free UT

On 1^st August 2016, the Campus Carry law came into effect at UT, which now means students are able to bring a concealed handgun onto most places on campus. These students must be licence holders (therefore, they must be twenty-one and older), the gun must be concealed, and the licence holder cannot carry the concealed handgun when intoxicated (University of Texas at Austin, 2016). It is estimated that less than one percent of UT students have a licence to carry a handgun (University of Texas at Austin, 2016).

Unsurprisingly, this change has been greeted by fierce reservations and intense debate. Three professors have attempted to sue UT and Texas state attorney to block the campus carry law (Dart, 2016a), whilst an American singer-songwriter, Ray LaMontagne, cancelled a show at the university after stating that he did not agree with campus carry (Blanchard, 2016). However, student protesters have received the most international attention with the campaign Cocks Not Glocks (Dart, 2016b). The campaigners aimed to fight the law by highlighting the absurdity of being able to carry a gun on campus yet being unable to brandish a sex toy on campus. The protest aimed to challenge the perception that carrying a weapon is normal.

One of the posters around campus protesting against campus carry

Opponents of campus carry argue that guns in the classroom may frighten students, which discourages free expression and arguably upsets the foundations of academia. Professors may avoid critical thinking and controversial debate in order to prevent potential confrontation. On the other hand, proponents of campus carry argue that they are able to exercise their second amendment rights and enhance self-protection if a shooting does occur. Others assert more guns on campus will lead to more danger; those with an armed weapon may not be trained to handle it at critical moments, and there may be multiple confusion and false alarms. This all leads to an increased likelihood of danger.

Perhaps most painfully and tragically ironic is that 1^st August 2016 also marks fifty years since UT’s mass shooting; in 1966, Charles Whitman climbed to the top of the university tower and shot forty-three people, killing thirteen (Texas Monthly, 2016). In an interview with The Guardian, one of the survivors spoke openly condemning the law, stating that she hopes open carry becomes banned (Dart, 2016c).

I come from a country where police officers are not permitted to carry guns in public, never mind university students; guns are a thing I only see in films. Therefore, I find it slightly unnerving to be present at a university where the campus carry debate is happening and to be living in a country where a gun is regarded to be such a casual possession. On my third day in Austin, I met a nineteen-year-old who had six guns. I didn’t quite know how to process that information. In this regard, I have entered a complete new world.

Texas has now become the ninth state that has affirmative policies enabling students to carry guns on campus (NCSL, 2016). I sense that campus carry is a bleak reminder that regardless of how liberal Austin is perceived to be, it is governed and consequently controlled by a Republican state. And maybe most significantly, this is something that Austin cannot escape. It will be interesting to see whether UT accepts this harsh reality over time.

References

Blanchard, B. (2016) Ray LaMontagne Cancels Show at UT-Austin Over Campus Carry Law [Online]. Austin: The Texas Tribune. Available at http://www.texastribune.org [Accessed: 3 October 2016]

Dart, T. (2016a) Professors sue University of Texas and state attorney over campus carry laws [Online]. London: The Guardian. Available at http://www.theguardian.com [Accessed: 3 October 2016]

Dart, T. (2016b) Cocks Not Glocks: Texas students carry dildos on campus to protest gun law [Online]. London: The Guardian. Available at http://www.theguardian.com [Accessed: 3 October 2016].

Dart, T. (2016c) UT Tower shooting survivor speaks out against new campus carry law in Texas [Online]. London: The Guardian. Available at http://www.theguardian.com [Accessed: 3 October, 2016].

NCSL (2016) Guns on Campus: Overview [Online]. Denver: National Conference of State Legislature. Available at http://www.ncsl.org/research/education/guns-on-campus-overview.aspx [Accessed: 3 October 2016].

Texas Monthly (2016) The UT Tower Shooting [Online]. Austin: Texas Monthly. Available at http://www.texasmonthly.com/category/topics/ut-tower-shooting/ [Accessed: 3 October 2016].

University of Austin at Texas (2016) Campus Carry [Online]. Austin: The University of Texas at Austin. Available at https://campuscarry.utexas.edu/ [Accessed: 3 October 2016]. 

A new beginning in Austin, Texas

‘So… why Texas?!’ was a common question when I told people I was going to study at UT – often asked in a surprised and slightly concerned tone. This conundrum would then deepen for the inquirer when he/she found out that I am in fact vegetarian and I have never eaten fried chicken. People genuinely thought I may starve.

If I’m being honest, I don’t really know why I chose to study at UT; I arguably knew very little about Austin and even less about Texas. I knew that Texas is the second largest state by size (behind Alaska), bordering Mexico and is predominately Republican. However, Austin appealed to me; the city is regarded to be a liberal hotspot deep in the heart of Texas, completely different to surrounding Texan cities and towns, and actually does contain lots of vegetarian and vegan cafes (astonishingly to my Texan inquirers); the university is huge, with a total enrolment of nearly 51,000 students in 2015 (University of Texas at Austin, 2016) and is regarded to be the 16^th best public school in the USA (US News and World Report, 2016); the university is also campus based, with numerous free sport facilities. All of these points made me interested in University of Texas at Austin.

And now I’m here.

What have I learnt these past few weeks? Well, firstly it does rain in Texas and I’m profusely thankful I packed my umbrella. The campus is absolutely massive and unsurprisingly, with 51,000 students, it can be hard to find somewhere to sit. However, the campus is remarkably modern and pretty – unlike Austin. Austin does however have a certain hipster-y charm, in the sense that many buildings seem to have been built in the late twentieth century and consequently, produce an unintentional juxtaposition with 2016.

Students dress differently here compared to UCL, often clad in oversized t-shirts and sports shorts with sandals. I’ve found that the students I’ve spoken to have been really friendly and easy to talk to. However, people cannot do a British accent to save their life, as I start to realise how no one can truly pronounce ‘water’ in my accent. Speaking of accents, I’ve noticed how Americans pronounce certain words differently (e.g. processes, epoch, aluminium, ecology, and even geography), which has made me question my own pronunciations in my head at times...

I’ve also realised that it feels incredibly unnatural writing the date with the month first, sharing a room with someone is proving not to be too bad, and the closest supermarkets are a ten-minute bus ride away. Oh, and also the queue for Starbucks is huge.

View of downtown Austin 

UT's infamous tower - the equivalent of UCL's portico

A few of Austin's downtown office buildings

Experiencing one of Austin's farmers' market 

Although these differences may seem banal at first, they are helping create an image of Austin bit by bit and by May 2017, I hope that this image in my head is complete. I’ve already discovered what a UT football game is like and perhaps even more shocking, a Donald Trump rally. However, that’s something that I feel deserves its own story in another blog post… And even though I’ve only just started at UT, I sense this academic year is going to be very different to the one I am used to at UCL.

References

University of Texas at Austin (2016) Facts and Figures [Online]. Austin: The University of Texas at Austin. Available at: https://www.utexas.edu/about/facts-and-figures [Accessed: 12 September 2016]. 

US News and World Report (2016) Top Public Schools [Online]. Available at: http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-universities/top-public [Accessed: 12 September 2016]. 

Welcome y’all to University of Texas at Austin

Week six in Austin, Texas and I’m wondering whether I’ll ever be able to say y’all naturally. However, I still have time (approximately eight months if we’re being precise). Anyway, here I am in the Lone Star State for the first time and so starts my year abroad documentation. I truly have no idea what the next eight months will bring, whether that is academically, emotionally or socially. Regardless, I plan to record my year abroad experiences and hopefully, reflect upon them to discuss how I ‘geog’ and live differently at UCL compared to UT.

I’m excited for this year to unfold and to share it with ya’ll (I think I used it correctly this time…).