• Published on

    Shawn Yim 2026: Further Reflections

    Picture
    A year and change after Shawn Yim’s passing (read my essay on him here), I find myself having thoughts. 

    I notice that where there should be answers, there remain only questions. In 2024 I wondered if this event might finally be the one to galvanize our elected officials into taking action and cleaning up our city (remember, it's not Metro but our local governments we should be looking to: it isn't buses that are unsafe, but Seattle at large). 

    Unfortunately such hope has thus far gone unrewarded. 

    Nothing, not even fentanyl, is as addictive as maintaining the status quo. And the status quo bothers me because it favors the few over the needs of the many. It isn't just that people like Richard, Shawn's murderer, are suffering; it's that folks like Shawn, and Richard’s murdered roommate, and all their friends and family, have to suffer too.

    People who are a danger to themselves and others should not be left to rot in public, nor to act out as they please, with no regard for their neighbors. We naively believed people would obey laws even if there were no consequences for breaking them. We hoped people with problems would proactively self-select their own healthy solutions. What beauty there is in this optimism. I wish we lived in that world. 

    We do not. 

    Apathy is simply too easy, too tempting a thing to enact, especially if it's dished out to you daily. My friends on the street feel abandoned, ignored, and despised, and they accordingly respond with their own version of the same. As long as securing a job that pays for rent remains nigh-impossible; as long as basic needs and mental health solutions hide behind a forest of bureaucracy; as long as society works to make each person feel isolated, unheard and alone– violence will remain what it always has been: a voice for the oppressed. An opportunity to feel liberation, power, however briefly. A way of finally being seen. I see the satisfaction some of them take in annoying or scaring normies like me, they, who have a degree of struggle, and a degree of freedom, the rest of us will likely never know. 

    Recently my entire bus was harassed by a screaming person with schizophrenic tendencies who refused to leave my bus, resisting every polite, respectful, cajoling, and finally firm attempt by me, even after I was out of service. No help responded, and no security was in sight. All I could do was sit there as he ranted, myself a prisoner to his whims and his schedule, forced to watch as he declared he had COVID and commenced coughing on me, reaching up over the shield. I noticed I was shaking afterwards.

    We live in a city where such behaviors go largely unchecked. If you've never been a victim of street crime, this is easier to tolerate. If you have, it becomes harder to remember that systemic oppression enables and causes these behaviors. You notice what is also true, which is that Jeffrey (that was his name) in no way felt oppressed. He felt what he paradoxically also was: free. Jeffrey can be himself however his brain dictates, acting out against whomever and wherever he chooses, without consequences. What problem? I saw genuine joy as he toyed with me, and the others, a brain running on profane and gleeful overdrive. Any student of anthropology knows that societies cannot function without restrictions on individual freedoms; but how much freedom is too much?

    In my recent Elliott Bay talk I was asked how one would solve Seattle’s homelessness/safety/mental health/drugs problem. At the time I fumbled for an answer. If I were answering now I think I'd say that I don't think our elected officials or other power brokers will ever succeed in fixing the crisis... unless they can be convinced that it's a for-profit venture. I'm terribly sorry to sound so cynical but in our capitalistic society, I unfortunately think that's the only thing that will provide liftoff. Sort of like how the environmental movement didn't meaningfully get going until they figured out how to turn it into an excuse for people to buy stuff– cars, light bulbs, and so on. 

    The crisis needs to be presented either as an opportunity to make tons of money, or a scenario that is currently preventing the making of tons of money. And the thing is, it is possible to make that argument, with reference to declining property values vis-a-vis real crime and perceived crime, all of our closed storefronts, Seattle’s growing reputation as a dangerous place, etc. But this argument would have to compete with the current state of affairs: not solving homelessness is clearly very lucrative for somebody. I’ll let others do the finger-pointing here.

    Whenever this eventually gets solved, it will be too late. For now, more years will pass, and my friends on the street will continue to thrive within the confines they're given. As people rendered invisible by the system, some of them will continue to treat those around them with corresponding inhumanity. My colleagues and I will still be harassed, intimidated and maybe killed. My female friends– drivers, passengers, commuters– will continue to tell me the horrors they've suffered on buses and sidewalks, horrors which leave scars that never go away.

    My street peeps will tell me of the stunning inhumanity only they know, how it continues casually, a tide you can hardly fight against, the barrage of constant messaging telling you you’re worthless. We wonder why they walk into the middle of the street. I think of Delillo’s line from Underworld every time: “If you [believe] your life is worth nothing, only a gamble with death can gratify your vanity.” They will continue wandering out there, hoping for contact, and I will continue to deny them the pleasure. They may not value their lives, but I do.

    My passengers will go on telling me how they're investing in weapons, cars, tasers, e-bikes, plans to move away, plans to change their hours– anything but this. As the only person on the bus not allowed to carry a weapon, the only person not allowed to leave a dangerous situation, I listen politely, trying to remember the difference between real solutions and mere Band-Aids.

    And the systems in power will sing their considerate song while ultimately doing nothing for either side. Loneliness, the disease of every epoch but especially ours, will continue seeping into our blood, spreading, raising the walls between us until we forget that we are made of the same clay and have most of the same experiences.

    We will also continue to have hope. 

    We will imagine better worlds and wonder why our leaders aren't similarly interested. It will still feel electrifying to connect, commune, assist, contribute. The buzzing altruistic rush we feel when we connect with another, when we bring someone joy and belonging; who could forget how much better it feels to give, than to receive?

    What I hope most for in writing this despairing essay is to be proven wrong. I want our city's exciting new leadership to quickly render the above problems dated and obsolete. I dream of a day when the selfish apathy of our time reveals itself as a facade. When all our basic needs are met, and for that to be evident to us, because only then can we begin caring for those around us. Only then can empathy blossom on a large scale. 

    We will survive, meanwhile, and we will hope. We will take small steps toward goodness. It is what we can do, and what we have to do.
  • Published on

    Elliott Bay Author Talk Video (Finally!)

    Picture
    ​Better late than never– here's the full video of this very special event. I'm so honored to have been invited to that hallowed stage, upon which so many inspirational luminaries of mine have trod, and to be privileged enough to share the stage with the great Tom Eykemans. That it was Elliott Bay, and not just Elliott Bay but a standing-room only, sold-out event at Elliott Bay humbles me beyond words. I know I don't deserve this. Thanks to everyone who came– and to those who tried (afterwards, I was told of someone who tried to attend and rode the 8 to get there… but true to form, the 8 was so “L8” that she missed the entire event!! Big virtual hug to whoever you are, for making the effort!).

    I also wanted to use this blog space to expand upon some of my replies in the Q&A. It's hard to come up with something in the moment, in front of an audience, in a way that you feel represents your views well enough to withstand the perpetuity of internet-land. As you can see, I fumble for what to say when the estimable Ryan Packer asks his question about what the solution is for Seattle's homelessness crisis. It really is the million-dollar question of our city. My answer, upon further reflection, is a big one, though I'm reluctant to share it right this second– it involves Shawn Yim, who's on my mind after passing almost exactly a year ago. Give me more time to find the right words. (For now, click for my essay and NPR interview from the time of his death.)

    I also fail to give a straight answer when answering another great question– how to reduce the distance between management and operations, a distance which is the cause of so much inefficacy and strife not just at King County Metro but pretty much every other bureaucratic or corporate space. Thankfully the solution for that question is simple, even if I couldn't come up with it on the spot: hire internally. 

    Enjoy the full event below! More on the book, including many more videos and other press, here.
  • Published on

    Remembering Why We Love Trolleys

    Image description
    It isn’t just nostalgia. Or the indisputable fact that we already have the infrastructure in place. Or how quiet they are, how good they are at going up Seattle’s hills, or how they qualify for different funding streams. It’s all of that and a lot more. I know battery-electric buses are all the rage right now, because we’ve been conditioned to get excited about what is new. But sometimes oldies remain goodies.

    Trolley buses remain financially competitive as a zero-emissions alternative in comparison to Battery Electric Buses (BEBs) for several reasons. I won’t regurgitate the excellent research done by others, but I will link to and summarize it so you have a solid starting point if you ever need ammunition for this argument in your work groups and meetings. 

    The three best technical sources I’ve found are this July 2023 report done for MUNI (here), this UTM cost comparison of trolley vs battery infrastructure installation, and this January 2025 report done for Poland. Although there's a lot more in the above links, here are a few points that stood out to me:
    • Trolley buses are more energy efficient because they don’t require overnight charging, which requires a massive electricity draw that shouldn’t be overestimated;
    • A smaller spare ratio of trolleys is needed as compared with BEBs, because trolleys don’t need to dwell at the base to charge;
    • Trolleys have increased energy efficiency because they use electricity only as needed while in operation;
    • They’re better for the environment because their batteries are much smaller (less strip-mining for precious metals);
    • They’re lighter, and thus result in less wear and tear on roads;
    • Trolleys fit the federal definition of fixed-route service, a la rail, and thus qualify for funding that BEBs can’t;
    • Trolley infrastructure is already proven, and in place

    Our current BEB fleet bears out these observations, particularly in that they’ve historically been unreliable for use on all-day runs. There are also plenty of YouTube videos detailing why trolleys surpass battery vehicles, especially as borne out by data in the last several years.  The second half of this video is useful in breaking down some of the electrical engineering problems that may bite us in the future. 

    The above points speak for themselves, from the standpoints of both fiscal and environmental responsibility. I’m totally ignoring the additional fact that driving trolleys is just plain more fun. It’s like driving a manual transmission: more challenging, sure, but also more involving, more present, and ultimately more enjoyable; like any sports or art or other craft, trolleys are a skill that feels good to finally master. They ask for more from us, and in turn reveal and concretize more of our abilities, the way playing chess is more fun than playing checkers. 

    They also represent a unique asset in defining Seattle’s multimodal dimensions, those linguistically, culturally and civically multitudinous qualities which cause us to be the rare American city that feels about as European as one of our cities can be. History is not often allowed to breathe or show its face in West Coast America, but trolleys carry that  quality we feel when we cross the Atlantic or visit the Eastern seaboard, the tangible reminder that generations existed before we did, and they knew a thing or two we can still learn from. 

    The challenge of living in a society focused on short-term gains instead of long-term benefits is that obviously good things are sometimes destroyed at a lasting loss to everyone. We use the term “capitalism” as shorthand for describing this problem, but the best example of this when it comes to trolley buses is Moscow, who recently dismantled their trolley network, formerly the world’s largest, in what today is almost universally recognized as a colossal mistake. The official reasons given at the time now read as obviously false (they even tried to suggest that diesel fumes would be more environmentally friendly than electrical output!), and we now know the decision had to do with lucrative contracts with BEB manufacturers, redistribution of routes among operating companies, and the erroneous assumption that they’d save electricity. Embarrassingly, the BEB and diesel replacements are now unable to efficiently heat themselves, and demand even more energy consumption than the previous system, which was tried and true since 1933. 

    Meanwhile, Budapest and numerous other cities are expanding their trolley bus lines (also click here for fleet breakdown info), investing in new overhead and equipment– including, eventually, our own Seattle! These lists do not include other thriving locations, from the massive network in nearby Vancouver, B.C. to far-flung Chelyabinsk, which I’m told has a very good deputy minister of road management and transport, unusual for Russia. In the Clean Technica article linked in the bibliography below, Michael Barnard writes about Nancy as a useful counterexample to Moscow:

    “Similarly, the French city of Nancy offers a cautionary and instructive tale of urban transit innovation. In 2000, Nancy replaced its traditional trolleybuses with an experimental guided-bus system called TVR, which proved unreliable and costly over two decades. After finally scrapping the TVR in 2023, Nancy returned to trolleybus technology, deploying bi-articulated IMC trolleybuses on its busiest urban corridors. This return was not nostalgic but rather pragmatic, leveraging partial re-use of existing overhead wiring while employing off-wire battery operation to maintain aesthetics in the historic city center. Early public feedback in Nancy has been strongly positive, citing improved reliability, comfort, and environmental performance.”

    I know BEBs are more politically popular at the moment, but trolleys represent a more stable, proven, efficient, and fiscally responsible choice. Thankfully we don’t have to choose between one or the other, of course, but if we prioritize expanding our trolley network, I think future generations will be thanking us. 

    Links & Further Reading:

    Reports:
    Articles/Videos

    Problems with BEBs vs Trolleys
    Trolley expansion internationally


    Just nerding out:
  • Published on

    The Harder Thing

    Picture
    I never look at accidents. You end up slowing everything down and risking a second accident through your distraction (yes, this does happen). But most of all, I avoid looking because, well, if I was over there in that wreckage and these were my last moments on earth, I wouldn't want a bunch of distracted strangers gawking at me like a zoo animal. Death is too significant, too intimate, for such callous ignominy. 

    So when I saw the other side of 5th and Jackson stacked with ambulances, police, a fire truck, and more, I didn't bother looking over. I concentrated on getting through safely, thankful I was on the side of the street that was still open. At the zone a middle-aged woman boarded who happened to be Black. Her energy seemed receptive to conversation.

    I said, “What happened over there?”
    “A stabbing,” she replied. “A Samoan guy stabbed a Black guy.”
    “Oh no!”
    “Wa’n’t his fault though, the Black guy was actin’ up, runnin’ his mouth you know. They be drinkin’ together everyday.”
    “Yeah, they're out there for sure.”
    “He ain't gon’ die though. They stopped the bleeding. He gon’ pull through.”
    “That's good. Stabbing’s no joke!”
    “No it ain't. I got my finger cut off once, uh accident wit’ a fryer, but they got to it in time, they done sewed it up back together, now it work just fine. I can't feel this part though, right along the edge.”
    “That's scary. That's beautiful too though.” What did I mean by that?
    “I got my legs busted up once too, doctor done told me I wasn't gon’ walk again–”
    “But here you are!”
    “Here I am!”
    “I'm so glad it worked out that way with your hand, I mean that it wasn't worse! I'm so glad they got to it in time!”
    “Me too. We got to be thankful, always. And loving, not like these fools out here. It's about love. Gotta love ‘em no matter what they do to us.”
    What bold phrasing, I thought. “Ooh, that's good. Yeah.”
    “No matter how they do. Sometime you gotta love ‘em from a distance though!”
    “Ha, you got that right! Give ‘em a lil’ bit o’ space!”
    “Takin’ care a yoself, but you can still love ‘em.”
    “No matter what they do to us, wow,” I said, reflecting. “I so appreciate you for puttin’ it in those words. I need that reminder!”
    “‘Cause sometimes you wanna do that other thing.”
    “That can be real tempting.”
    “But it gots to be love instead, else those cycles of badness don't never stop.”

    You've heard love your enemies before, but her phrasing rebirthed the concept as fresh, new, immediate. In her words I heard the acknowledgement of how hard it can be to do, as well as how necessary.

    Before, when we were wronged, we were taught to put up with it. Now, we're taught to speak up. Sometimes, we're taught to get angry about it. All that is fine, but I've noticed on a longer timeline the latter approach doesn't work for me. And I don't mean in the euphemistic sense of it not being my preference, but that it doesn't actually accomplish anything for me. 

    I've been wronged, as you no doubt have too, in ways that cannot be fixed. But staying angry eventually proves to be little more than a waiting game, and a pointless one at that. On a long enough timeline all angry people would eventually have the thought: Wait a second. Being mad isn't making me happier. It just perpetuates a lousy mood, which I don't have time for. While I'm busy stewing how I never deserved this and I hope they burn in hell and so on and so forth, my aggressors have moved on. It'll be me that gets the ulcer in this scenario, not them. Two things can both be true: a hunger for justice, and the need for sanity.

    There's no one right way to react to being wronged or slighted. If there was, recovery would be a cakewalk. But her way, her nimble, big-hearted, endlessly giving way… I shook my head in admiration and respect. Talk about taking life as it comes and making the best of it. 

    I wonder what the wronged man across the street would make of this discussion– not now, not tomorrow, but a year or two from now. Five years. Distance helps.

    Somewhere deep inside, our best self knows the words, and the calm that comes with them. I struggle mightily at it, as I imagine that man over there will too, but her outlook was the reminder I needed to hear. It is the sentence I'd like to imagine I know, but am so far from actually embodying.

    The harder thing, and the right thing, are often the same.
  • Published on

    Small Changes, Big Differences: Problems with the 2025 Reissue of In The American West

    Picture
    Above: "Mike Bencich, Dan Ashberger, coal miners, Somerset, Colorado, 8/29/80," by Richard Avedon

    Two months ago I rhapsodized about Richard Avedon's In The American West, which I consider the greatest American photographic contribution since WWII. I talked about how rare the images are and the unique circumstances in which I came to find them. I was happy to share that the images would finally become easily accessible, in the form of a reissued book.

    Alas.

    I had a chance to look over the new Abrams release myself, and my heart sunk as soon as I opened the pages. The pictures are there, but their essence, their life and sparkle and indomitable presence– have been removed. How? Why?

    The short version: 1) I love these images. And 2) Don’t buy this book. Here’s the breakdown:

    As a professional photographer familiar with darkroom practice and the difference between various printing methods I recommend avoiding this release. Printing costs for art books have risen dramatically in the last 20 years, and publishers cut corners more than they used to in order to maximize profit. Sadly, the latest reissue of this monumental series is a victim of this approach.

    I own the 1985 first edition, and a side-by-side comparison with the 2025 release is a heartbreaker: the 40th anniversary book features noticeably less dynamic range, uses a non-lustre paper type that has too much texture to represent fine detail, an ink/paper combo that resists full blacks, and an overall lack of fidelity when compared to the original images. As fans of the photos know, Avedon was meticulous and supervised the original book. This publication differs wildly, and although things like tonal range and resolution sound like technical details, they do have an emotional impact. The 1985 book grabs you by the throat; this one leaves you indifferent. Which is really saying something, considering how striking Avedon's original images are.

    [Because digital cameras are inferior to film on precisely the areas we're comparing, and because uncalibrated computer monitors have subtle differences of their own, the best method of highlighting the problems is to use words instead of photographs.] Thus:

    These examples are all taken from images early in the book for your convenience in comparing, but the problems exist throughout the whole book:

    1. In the first picture, look at Allen Silvy’s rightmost eye. In the 1985 book we can discern and visually separate his eyebrow hair, his eyelid, and his eyelash. In the 2025 book all three of these elements are muddled into the same hue of dark grey.
    2. Take a look at the face of Loudilla Johnson (Loretta Lynn fan club triptych, center face); in the 1985 book, she's glowing; in the 2025 printing, her face looks greasy. The gray goes to white too quickly. Look at the out-of-focus neck of Kay Johnson, to the right of her; in 1985 we get a subtle gradation that in 2025 looks instead like digital sludge. Loretta, on the left, also had more light-colored strands of hair that in 2025 are rendered as an invisible white.
    3. For a more striking example, look at the title page image (Mary Watts/Tricia Steward (factory worker with her niece); in 1985, niece Tricia's eyes pop, and her face is comprised of many shades of light grey. In 2025, her face goes to near-white almost immediately. And notice how the ink creates a different shade of black for Tricia's shirt, which feels more brittle, less rich.
    4. Look at housekeeper Patricia Wilde's freckles; she has less of them in the 2025 version, and the details of her hair are less readable.
    5. One of the joys of these photos has always been how crisp they are, coming as they do from 8x10 negatives; one cannot experience that joy in the 2025 reissue. For instance, Patricia’s hair strands above, and the detail in Judy Gustavson's eye (wife of unemployed copper miner Roy Gustavson, a couple pages further in).
    6. But if you needed any inarguable proof that the book is presenting something different than the original intent, look at Roy Gustavson's face's skin color! It's totally changed! Did he just spend 40 years in a tanning salon?? :) What's the deal? If this doesn’t say shoddy print job, I don’t know what does. Notice also the comparative lack of tonal range in the stripes on his shirt.

    In summary, the new book appears to have been taken from a third-generation source, most likely digital scans of pages of the old book, rather than first or second-generation sources like proof prints or negs. There's a reason the high online price for the 1985 and 2005 editions has not gone down, despite the availability and low price of this 2025 book; it's simply not the same experience. I encourage seeking out the earlier editions– both the 1985 and 2005 contain a line on the front matter page that reads, "printed and bound in Japan." That's how you know you're getting the good stuff.

    If you've seen the prints in person, as I have, or own the 1985 book, this printing will be a massive disappointment. For Abrams and Italy's Conti Typocolor (where this book was printed, unlike all previous editions), this is an embarrassment that's offensive to Avedon's legacy and the legacy of his most significant and essential body of work. Should we be surprised, then, that this reissue is nowhere to be found on either the Avedon Foundation website nor that of Conti Typocolor?

    In one important way, Abrams’ catastrophic cash grab of a blunder actually continues Avedon's wishes. The pictures were never meant to be widely available. They have always been hard to find, something you have to search for, travel far to see, not unlike Avedon himself driving for hours and days to stay in touch with the friends he found in making this series. In our day nothing is sacred because everything is accessible, repeatable, duplicable. Scarcity is the new currency of value. And Avedon's climactic, most talked-about, most influential photographic contribution has unexpectedly remained exactly that: scarce, elusive, rare. It is rare no longer by design but by the incompetence and greed of publishing bureaucracies, but maybe that's neither here nor there. What really matters is that the pictures, like the people in them, continue to live mostly hidden lives, far from the limelight, available to be appreciated only by those with eyes to see.
    Picture
    Janet Tobler, housewife, and her husband Randy, insulator, Glenrock, Wyoming, 9/4/83
  • Published on

    WTBBL Podcast: Nathan Vass

    Picture
    Better late than never– here's a recent interview with me at the Washington Talking Book and Braille Library, which by the way is a Seattle treasure I can't recommend enough– a library that's open to all, sighted or otherwise, and inside a historic former auto dealership to boot! We discuss both my books and everything in between.

    ​Listen here! Enjoy!

    ​Photo by Miriam Kolker.