I'm not a water snob. A water snob, in my book, is a person who is very particular to which brand of water their allegiances lie. A water snob may in fact not drink any water out of any tap, regardless of how much fluoride may be in said tap water. Water snobs also probably don't accidentally drink any water in the shower, ever.
Now again, I'm not a water snob. I drink tap water if need be, and like it. New York City's water is actually pretty decent, but I've been known to drink tap water in other countries (except for Mexico; I was very careful to be a water snob there due to overwhelming concerns about bacteria in their water supply). I'm generally not picky about Pellegrino or tap at restaurants. And yes, I'm that person who chews on ice chips, well aware that they probably didn't use the filtered water for those.
When it comes to buying bottled water, however, I've become aware that some of it is better than others. Now, I'll preface this by saying that I try to avoid purchasing bottled water. I think the excess plastic is terrible for the environment and the PUR filter on my tap at home does the job pretty well.
That said, sometimes you need to buy bottled water. Normally, I stick with Poland Spring; usually, that's the only thing that's sold by the street vendors or underground subway vendors in New York City. Though apparently (shockingly!) it isn't available on the west coast, at all. I'm going to pretend (and who knows, maybe I'm right?) that its limited availability on the west coast is due to the company wishing to keep a small carbon footprint.
Then, there's the stuff bottled by big business — Dasani (bottled by Coca Cola), Nestle Pure Life, Smart Water. These are all okay. They aren't terrible, and will do okay in a pinch (like, for example, when you need more water than what can fit in your re-usable bottle). I have to say that Pure Life is pretty much like Poland Spring, but with a blue label; tastes fine, though, with the Nestle name, you would have expected it to have a chocolate flavor to it (not that we should aspire to have chocolate-tasting-water, gross!). Or maybe that's just me. I think about Nestle Toll House and Nestle Crunch when I think of their brand.
Finally, the good, the bad, and the ugly.
I'll start with the good and the bad: Fiji water. Fiji water comes in wonderful looking containers (more square than cylindrical) with beautiful flowers on the label. You imagine a lush island with the most amazing water you've ever tasted. What you don't imagine are military juntas selling off the region's most precious resource to us abroad while their own people have no access to it. Not a pretty picture. Great water, but it makes my heart hurt. I really don't want to be stressed when purchasing a bottle of water.
And lastly, there's the ugly — Evian. It's "naive" spelled backwards, which should be evidence alone that there's something not quite right about this water. I can't put my finger on it, but one thing is true, this water tastes like someone sucked the life out of it. I recently bought two large bottles because they were on sale; clearly, there was a very good reason for this.
So, in short, I think I'll just stick to re-filling my Camelbak BPF-free water bottle with what comes out of the tap and, unless I'm on the west coast, buying good old reliable Poland Spring water bottles as needed.
(Oh, and don't get me started on Propel and Vitamin Water – which is more sugar than water – and all the other "flavored" varieties. That's a blog post for another day.)
Observation on Museums
Tuesday, November 22nd, 2011I'll preface this by saying that maybe this opinion is largely the way it is because I'm a (relatively) young person.
I'm a member of both the Metropolitan Museum of Art ("The Met" for short here in New York City) and the Museum of Modern Art (MoMA). I started with MoMA membership a year ago and decided to renew this year. The MoMA is a cool place to hang out, has lots of exhibitions of interest to me, and is pretty accessible to my house by train. This year, I decided to get a membership to The Met. I was mostly attracted by the Alexander McQueen exhibit (I won't lie to you, the opportunity to skip to the members line and avoid a 2+ hour wait was appealing) but I've been to The Met many times before and there are some pieces of their permanent collection that really speak to me. Additionally, I discovered that they have a killer roof deck that overlooks Central Park.
That said, I don't make use of these memberships nearly enough. I wish I could find more time to go, particularly during members-only hours when I could really make the best use of my membership in avoiding the herds of tourists. However, I've noticed some differences in how these museums speak to me as a member and thought it might make interesting fodder for my blog (which, I know, I haven't updated in quite a few months).
I find that MoMA is a lot better at asking for money than The Met is; and I should mention that this doesn't mean that MoMA contacts me more frequently about it. Actually, the reverse is true! I get a lot of mail from The Met asking me for money and I just became a member in August of this year. I would understand if I was reaching the end of my membership period and they were looking to retain me, but it's only been a few months. To be honest, the excessive asking is making me consider NOT renewing my membership next year.
On the contrary, I find MoMA's ask to be less, well, annoying because not only does it happen less frequently, but I get much more useful content from MoMA on a regular basis. Every month, I get a booklet from MoMA that tells me what is going on at the museum. It's a tall narrow book (it looks sort of like a Zagat guide in size) so it is easily portable in case you wanted to take it with you to the museum. In addition, as a member of their "Film Plus" program, I get one or two emails a month about specials screenings that I am able to attend gratis with that membership. These emails even go so far as to make it easy for you to RSVP. If you click on "YES" in the email, you get routed to where you can complete your RSVP. If you click on "NO," they know you are not attending and will stop contacting you about that event.
Now, fast forward to today, I check my mail and find two items from The Met. One is a monthly members calendar and the other is a fall bulletin. I find this confusing. Why mail me two things? Just send me one thing, and kill less trees. The fall bulletin is a large magazine-sized book but on the outside of it is yet another ask for money. I'm not so much bothered by the ask as much as the fact that this jacket on the outside of the fall bulletin was covering a wrap-around cover that featured the restored painting of Washington crossing the Delaware, which looks pretty freakin' cool. Why would you cover that? And apparently the fall bulletin is a lot of in depth information about the restoration of that painting. Very interesting stuff. How about putting the ask for money in the middle of the book? So while I'm perusing it and realizing how hard you guys work, I can think about donating before the year's end.
Instead, I'm annoyed because you keep asking me for money in all the wrong ways and compelled to blog about it!
Tags: commentary, museums, observation, personal
Posted in personal | No Comments »