Mariner of The Seas vs. Ocean Liners of The Past

*bicker* wrote:
A 4 Jan 2005 07:32:03 -0800, "Benjamin Smith"
escribi=F3:
But sooner or later, those ships will be retired or
transferred, and that option won't be available.

As long as that option carries with it sufficient interest
on the part of the public, so much so that it drives
purchasing decisions, that option will be offered.
Companies only remove products and services that no longer
drive customers' purchasing decision.


bicker, you really aren't entering a perspective that has any type of
profound life experience behind it. Business principles don't replace
profound life experiences on what are lifestyle-aspect results of
products provided to the public in another era.

My first cruise was on the HAL Rotterdam V. A legendary ship. It went
into service in 1959 and I sailed aboard it in 1970. I sailed with my
father, just us two, and that in itself was profound since my father
was the breadwinner of the house, worked nights, and I did not see him
often. This is one ship that's hard to follow but this ship set my
expectations and values of what passenger ships can be. Not what SHOULD
be, CAN be. The HAL of today is not the HAL of the 1970s that wasn't
the HAL of the 1940s. There will never be another HAL Rotterdam V.

When I write that I find something in a fairly current ship that was
reminiscent of a defining experience in my life and it is an option
that seems be fading away (as these things do in time) I find it a
trite response to be reminded of whatever business rationale may be
behind it. When some of us write about our prefences in a lifestyle
that is cruising, and what we opine may be fortunate or unfortunate
(personal or otherwise) developments, it's based on how we shared
experiences with people both close and that became close to us on our
voyages, and not with anything else in mind.

Change is change, not necessarily positive or negative. As times change
and there are less products made for niches and more for a standardized
mass audience, with it comes a certain sense of loss. One can make a
choice to embrace some changes, others can voice concerns that the
changes will take away valued experiences of what a lifestyle CAN
offer.

Ben S.




=20
--
bicker=AE

Ben S. wrote:

All of the latest generation ships from the mainstream cruise lines
have stern balconies.

On 05 Jan 2005 03:27:54 GMT, RTCReferee wrote:

If I'm not mistaken, the Coral Princess and Island Princess do not have stern
(wake-view) balconies.

http://www33.brinkster.com/lduive12/cruise/coral_p1.htm

http://www31.brinkster.com/lduive7/cruise/island_1.htm

....which means that the new MSC ships may not have them either.

Ben S. wrote:

All of the latest generation ships from the mainstream cruise lines
have stern balconies.

On 05 Jan 2005 03:27:54 GMT, RTCReferee wrote:

If I'm not mistaken, the Coral Princess and Island Princess do not have stern
(wake-view) balconies.

http://www33.brinkster.com/lduive12/cruise/coral_p1.htm

http://www31.brinkster.com/lduive7/cruise/island_1.htm

....which means that the new MSC ships may not have them either.

On Tue, 04 Jan 2005 23:16:21 GMT, Benjamin Smith wrote:

I went on my first ship at 10 years of age and one of the memories
that sticks with me to this day was the aft area of the Rotterdam V and
going from the promenade to the upper decks at the stern of the ship.
This public area of the ship has been turned to private area.

I appreciate your memories, Ben, but I find spending a lot of time
"remembering" gets in the way of enjoying today. To have an jaded view of
what is a "real ship" based on nostalgia, imo, is a trip down that lane I
will pass by, thank you.

On Wed, 05 Jan 2005 12:38:56 GMT, Benjamin Smith wrote:

There are those onboard that value promenade decks, and over the years,
the use of stern deck space has been proven. Ships that are designed for
the whole ship community, not a few privileged few for such an important
part of the whole ship, are the ones I'm interested in.

Be as you like, but this concern about ship rear ends is disconcerting.

As to "priviledged", priced an aft lately? You will pay for that priviledge
on many sails today.

Most passengers
find a least one part of the ship they have no use for. Mine would be
casinos.

Mine would be the Men's bathrooms.

On Wed, 05 Jan 2005 12:38:56 GMT, Benjamin Smith wrote:

There are those onboard that value promenade decks, and over the years,
the use of stern deck space has been proven. Ships that are designed for
the whole ship community, not a few privileged few for such an important
part of the whole ship, are the ones I'm interested in.

Be as you like, but this concern about ship rear ends is disconcerting.

As to "priviledged", priced an aft lately? You will pay for that priviledge
on many sails today.

Most passengers
find a least one part of the ship they have no use for. Mine would be
casinos.

Mine would be the Men's bathrooms.

On 5 Jan 2005 07:42:28 -0800, Benjamin Smith wrote:

What makes a ship a ship and not a resort or hotel is
that it is on the water and has varied deck space, some in high traffic
areas near a lot of activity and high on the ship, other areas in lower
volume areas that are semi-private but accessible to all and, very
importantly, on various levels of the ship.

That is your definition. It is not mine. Definitions, like ships, change.

This has defined life on
board cruise ships for quite a while.

Note the past tense.

Balconies really are extensions
of outside cabins (making them truly outside cabins), and are on the
stateroom decks of the ships--when they are on the side of the ship.
When placed in the back, however, they no longer are on private areas
of the ship, and they take away from passengers that enjoy public deck
space and actually *define* their cruise experience by the open aft
deck space.

Pax who define their experiences via open aft spaces, and continue to
attempt to do so, will "define" themselves right out of the cruise
experience as you have.

On 05 Jan 2005 03:39:12 GMT, RTCReferee wrote:

The frenzy with which some people absolutely MUST have "THE ULTIMATE AFT
BALCONY" all to themselves to the exclusion of that important space being
shared by all onboard is something I find unappealing, to say the least.

It's only unappealing to those who either refuse to book these cabins or
can't give up on moments and memories long past gone.

Many RTCers are having trouble with the "new age of cruising". It's the
fault of those "lousy cruise lines" who have changed, changed I say. They
don't want change, they resist it and live in the past. They want more
formality, no Negroes, homos who don't kiss in public; if they don't like
Spanish kids, kick them in the hot tub, right PARNAMI?

Eat at specified times not when it is convenient and when you're hungry. We
have entire threads built around food.

I don't see these same ppl applauding the fact that cruising has been
opened up to "commoners" so that not only the "upper crusties" tut-tut ole
boy can enjoy these sensational experiences. I don't see them embracing
the Times Are just the Times Were.

I love an aft for its privacy alone. Privacy amongst the heathens LOL. I
cruise to "get away" not "get into".

Well, so be it. I ain't inviting you to my aft cabin anyway.

On Wed, 05 Jan 2005 18:59:26 GMT, Karen Segboer wrote:

Hans also is very fond of the ss ROTTERDAM V; in fact, he sailed on
the maiden voyage of that ship as a nine year old boy. Those
memories, and his quest to find out what happened to the ROTTERDAM V
in particular and HAL in general, started our long-term love of
cruising and became a wonderful hobby/interest for both of us. You
can't imagine the thrill of watching my grown-up husband rushing
around the ship he hadn't seen since he was a little boy,
investigating areas he recalled, looking for the things he remembered
from all those years ago, when we sailed on the ROTTERDAM V again. I
can only imagine Ben's excitement at being onboard and visiting the
ROTTERDAM V again after all those years. What wonderful memories!

I have no problem with things rediscovered.

Memories give us an idea of "what was" and give a firm basis to decide
how we like "what is." I actually feel very sorry for those who
never had a chance to travel on a real ocean liner active during their
heyday.

Karens

All fine and good. When your past drives your future, then it's time to let
the past go. In Ben's case, it has and it is a past, a recollection of
events, that will not reappear. Pine all he wants, he better love those
memories more than his cruising future since he has boxed himself into that
corner.

In your case, you have to honestly ask yourself if you did not, for the
longest time, fall into the same trap. There sat the VOTS (and now the
Dawn) at your front door. Until you let go, you missed out on a very
positive experience on VOTS as you reviewed.

It's like the food issue. You want/like your food. I would say you can get
great food all over Manhattan. So what if the Dawn food isn't up to snuff?
Did the sea go away? Did the ship fail to sail? Did the nite sky cease to
amaze? Did the wind forget to blow against your cheeks?

There is a much discussed phrase we stole from you in the Cruiser
household. "The ship *is* the destination."

I don't know. I think the sea, the oceans and the waters are.

The rest is up for grabs, EOTB, imo.

On Wed, 05 Jan 2005 18:59:26 GMT, Karen Segboer wrote:

Hans also is very fond of the ss ROTTERDAM V; in fact, he sailed on
the maiden voyage of that ship as a nine year old boy. Those
memories, and his quest to find out what happened to the ROTTERDAM V
in particular and HAL in general, started our long-term love of
cruising and became a wonderful hobby/interest for both of us. You
can't imagine the thrill of watching my grown-up husband rushing
around the ship he hadn't seen since he was a little boy,
investigating areas he recalled, looking for the things he remembered
from all those years ago, when we sailed on the ROTTERDAM V again. I
can only imagine Ben's excitement at being onboard and visiting the
ROTTERDAM V again after all those years. What wonderful memories!

I have no problem with things rediscovered.

Memories give us an idea of "what was" and give a firm basis to decide
how we like "what is." I actually feel very sorry for those who
never had a chance to travel on a real ocean liner active during their
heyday.

Karens

All fine and good. When your past drives your future, then it's time to let
the past go. In Ben's case, it has and it is a past, a recollection of
events, that will not reappear. Pine all he wants, he better love those
memories more than his cruising future since he has boxed himself into that
corner.

In your case, you have to honestly ask yourself if you did not, for the
longest time, fall into the same trap. There sat the VOTS (and now the
Dawn) at your front door. Until you let go, you missed out on a very
positive experience on VOTS as you reviewed.

It's like the food issue. You want/like your food. I would say you can get
great food all over Manhattan. So what if the Dawn food isn't up to snuff?
Did the sea go away? Did the ship fail to sail? Did the nite sky cease to
amaze? Did the wind forget to blow against your cheeks?

There is a much discussed phrase we stole from you in the Cruiser
household. "The ship *is* the destination."

I don't know. I think the sea, the oceans and the waters are.

The rest is up for grabs, EOTB, imo.