Well, the knowledge of emancipation certainly got to the Galveston slave-owners in 1862, at least.
Anyway, I never heard of Juneteenth until Atlanta. Relevant episode of which helped cause, anticipated, and mocked the shit out of everything that might appear in this thread.
I guess the civil war lasted a long time after the Emancipation Proclamation, so I guess slaves probably weren't freed anywhere else during those three years.
I have no issue with the holiday as such, but there are more reasonable dates/events than June 19th, 1865 (hint: not 1965, HB). I bet there were still some enslaved people who didn't get freed until later, and do we really want to celebrate the cluelessness of Texas? "The war is over, hadn't you heard?"
How about the date of the Emancipation Proclamation, for example? January 1, 1863. You can quibble that it had the weird bit that it didn't apply to slaves in the Union or Union-held territory, I guess. Probably can't overwrite New Years Day, alas.
How about December 6th, 1865, when the 13th Amendment was ratified? I guess you can't BBQ in December.
I'm sure the marketeers are happy, at least.
I should probably go refresh myself on that graphic novel I've got on this topic before I spout anything else off.
(hint: not 1965, HB)
ha! whoops. fixed.
I'm really pleased with the ways that Americans are re-imagining their country's history. One of the nice things about the 1619 project was the name. We memorize dates in school, and that's an important one!
As with 1619, Juneteenth focuses on a non-white experience. Congress could have gone with the date of the signing of the Emancipation Proclamation, and focused on a white savior. Our representatives made a better choice.
As far as the whole thing going sideways, hey, this is America. Of course we're going to fuck it up. I'm not troubled by our future Juneteenth mattress sales. That's how Americans honor their history.
What's going to piss me off is the way the Right will fit this into its intellectual framework: 1.) "This holiday never should have been approved. It is yet another example of guilty white liberals indulging undeserving minorities when the real work was done by a white president" and 2.) "This holiday is yet another example of all the wonderful things America does for these people, but they still aren't grateful."
Also, from the Left: 3.) "This is yet another example of liberals focusing on race when we really should be emphasizing historical moments that commemorate class conflict. Karl Marx was born on May 5."
And, from the Center: 4.) "This is yet another example of liberals needlessly antagonizing swing voters with an arbitrary focus on an unimportant date in history."
8 written before reading 5, but 8 to 5.
I'm still waiting to hear if this is one of the holidays where you are allowed to drink too much and, if yes, does that apply to white people.
10: Yes, and the jury's still out, respectively.
Thank you. My stomach is bad this year, so I'm waiting regardless.
I first learned of Juneteenth as a kid in tx; our housekeeper told my mom that she celebrated, inter alia, by drinking red soda pop. (I'm not actually sure she said "soda pop" which might have been my mom's idiolect rather than the housekeeper's). I see from the internet, having not looked into this in the intervening 55 years, that red pop is indeed a thing. If we're all to be observing the day now, maybe, Moby, this is the right start.
I just can't drink something carbonated. I can drink wine, but not beer.
Why is the liberal media focused on holidays about slavery instead of the very minor medical complaints of a middle-aged white guy who could fix all his problems by getting more exercise and not drinking for six months?
I feel personally attacked by 15.
Tragedy is my dyspepsia. Comedy is centuries of slavery and subjugation. (Mel Brooks didn't quite phrase it that way, but he did make Blazing Saddles.)
It's kinda weird that this very regional holiday has so suddenly hit the big time. It seems like the main reason is that it has a cool name, which is a pretty good reason. But it's not like Juneteenth was a country-wide holiday among Black people, it was Texas and Louisiana plus their diaspora.
It's too bad a national holiday can't be exclusive. I really don't think White people should get this holiday. (Leaving aside that most people won't get this holiday at all as it will probably be honored like Veterans Day.) I wonder how Germans living in the Netherlands mark Liberation Day? Quietly and somberly, I hope.
I first learned of Juneteenth as a kid in tx; our housekeeper told my mom that she celebrated, inter alia, by drinking red soda pop.
Big Red is a gross but popular super big thing here.
I really don't think White people should get this holiday.
As a white American, I totally want to celebrate this holiday, and feel entitled to do so. But if we're going to segregate our holidays, I want the complementary white-people holiday to be April 12 to commemorate Lee's surrender at Appomattox.
It can be a day of parties and celebration for African American people and a day of fasting and quiet contemplation of our sins for white people.
I just don't want to have to drink red diabetes.
I want the complementary white-people holiday to be April 12 to commemorate Lee's surrender at Appomattox.
Oh man, let's do this.
I really do take md's point in 19, though.
I'm not big on the concept of cultural appropriation, but this does feel a bit appropriat-ey. Peep has the solution for my ambivalence.
I feel like MLK day already plays the role of a sad holiday of contemplation and service, and that Juneteenth can and should be a party holiday for everyone. It's the summer! The end of slavery was a happy event! Let White kids learn Juneteenth is a fun celebration and then when they end up in history class they'll think the Confederacy losing is associated good fun thing.
We can rest assured that this holiday, like almost every other federal holiday, will become an occasion for celebrating the United States military. (Even on Christmas. As you celebrate Christmas with your family, remember that the United States Navy is protecting you with our ships deployed across the globe. We have the watch.) At least on this occasion there are grounds to mark the military's role. Especially the USCT.
I was just writing something very like 27. Not only should a summer three day weekend be a party, it's going to be a party no matter what scolds of various ilks have to say about it. I also think the die is cast re appropriation: that's what making a national holiday is.
The question is whether fat white guys grilling on boats should drink red soda pop. If we answer 'no' it won't be too many years before they'll be insisting on doing so to own the libs.
29 Well, actually, the proclamation was issued by the military, which had only recently captured Galveston.
I used to live in Texas, so I do find the sudden nationalization of the holiday to be weird. Did it spread out before this, or is this a top-down action by the administration? My main objection to it is that we shouldn't borrow anything from Texas.
I find the idea of 19 bizarre and horrifying. Is eternal blood guilt a cherished value now?
I was in the Netherlands for the last two Liberation Days, and I can tell you that Germans celebrate Liberation Day the same way as everyone else -- locked up in their house because of coronavirus.
Of course this warms the cockles of my shriveled heart, but looking at the text of S. 475 and the section being amended, why on earth did they not make it a Monday? We are being robbed of 2 out of 7 occurrences! Robbed I say!
My main objection to it is that we shouldn't borrow anything from Texas.
I think it's different when it's ultimately from Black people in Texas.
My work has a bunch of optional seminars but everyone is just working normally anyway.
33: The nationalization happened very quickly last year after Floyd's death, because it coincided with some of the largest BLM protests that summer.
I'm sure I mentioned this before, but I used to work for the DC office of an outfit headquartered in Philadelphia. Norms between the cities were different enough in the 90s that MLK day was not a holiday: while our DC peers closed, our Philly peers did not, and so all offices were open. So what happened in the DC office is that the entire Black staff (a majority of the staff) took a vacation day, while the lawyers (nearly all white) came in to work. After taking too long to see what was happening, I started calling it Confederate Flag Day, and didn't come in either.
This isn't the model we're looking for.
April 12 to commemorate Lee's surrender at Appomattox
Small potatoes. I counter-propose April 26, when Joseph Johnston surrendered to Sherman right here in Durham, the largest surrender during the war and the last of a major Confederate army. But just because I'm a homer.
In lieu of orange post titles, maybe we should take up a collection to buy Apo a blue Dodge Charger decorated with American flags and named the General Sherman.
Yesterday in our company's main slack channel, people were discussing our sudden new holiday. A Black woman said she was quietly crying. A white guy at the exact same moment posted that his yard would appreciate the extra attention. I didn't look in on the chat after that.
41: You wouldn't believe how fast that car gets to Atlanta.
22:. It just occurred to me that fasting and quiet contemplation of their sins should also be how Gentiles observe Passover.
Let me tell you about a thing called Lent that happens just about then.
Did you all get mail today? I assumed we wouldn't, but then we did.
I'm not going all the way downstairs to check.
Our garbage was picked up this morning.
I grew up in Texas and graduated high school in Weatherford ('81). Juneteenth was made a state holiday in 1980. And guess what? In our high school (nearly all white) we *never* learned about it. I learned about Juneteenth from a Black co-worker at the fast-food joint I worked at during and after graduating high school. Our school system taught the Dunning school version of the Civil War and Reconstruction, so of course, we didn't really learn the abomination that was slavery.
It's a great thing, that finally the end of slavery in America has its own Federal holiday. A great, great thing. Let's hope they don't do to it, what they did to Decoration Day.
In 1865, President Lincoln said, "without the military help of the black freedmen, the war against the south could not have been won".
Amen.
peep: "how Gentiles observe Passover."
I remember long ago reading an essay by a (IIRC Jewish) person writing about "What, to a Jewish person, is Christmas" (paraphrase). And they adduced the centuries-long history of pogroms (with some details) by Christians on Christmas, among other atrocities. Pretty awful stuff.
49: I too grew up in Texas and I think I learned about it, but not from the school system. (Convenient it doesn't fall during the school year!)
10. They didn't know how to cut no rug/But every cat had a gallon jug... (Louis Jordan, Juneteenth Jambotee, 1940)
8, 19, etc.: I'm actually opposed to national holidays for specific ethnic/racial groups. (I'm okay with individuals, MLK for example. Columbus, not so much.) How long until the big excitement about "Asians" requires a national holiday about Asians? What about every variety of Asian. ("Asian" as a descriptor is stupid anyway, lumping about three billion people with disparate histories, languages and cultures into one bucket.)
If people want to celebrate their race/ethnicity let it be free-form: St. Patrick's Day ("Evacuation Day" in Boston), Columbus Day (of course he may have been Jewish rather than Italian), Cinco de Mayo (which no one in Mexico celebrates), Juneteenth (no one outside Greater Texas had heard of, and as pointed out above, a lot of white people in Greater Texas hadn't either).
"Evacuation Day" in Boston
If that's just annually celebrated, you guys need some fiber.
Cinco de Mayo (which no one in Mexico celebrates)
Truth?
53: This comment is breathtaking in its awfulness. Try to be better.
To liken Juneteenth to St. Patrick's Day is .... a take, I guess. It's not about an ethnic group: it's about celebrating the end of slavery in America. And it should be *more* reason to celebrate that, that most white Americans don't know about the date. Because if you're going to celebrate a date when America made giant strides, why *wouldn't* it be Juneteenth? Every American should be proud and happy on Juneteenth, when we finally (after 150 years) started acting on the empty words in our founding documents.
I mean jesus h fucking christ, the mind just boggles.
Apparently Jim Clyburn was cribbing dates from Heebie's post (from an email today):
"There's another day in history that I often think of on Juneteenth, and that's January 1, 1963. That's when U.S. Gen. Rufus Saxton read the Emancipation Proclamation at a former plantation here in South Carolina where about 4,000 slaves came to hear it read."
55: Yes, truth. 5 de Mayo is a Mexican-American (and, these days, all non-Mexican Americans who like to drink margaritas) holiday. There's some commemoration in Puebla where the battle happened, but the actual national holiday in Mexico is Independence Day on September 16, and I think Mexicans tend to regard the American 5 de Mayo spectacle much as Irish people do St. Patrick's Day.
Our kids' school celebrates Sept 16th. (But also Cinco de Mayo.)
They should celebrate on June 19th too, because that's when they killed their last emperor.
56: This comment is breathtaking in its condescension. Try to be a more productive interlocutor.
Every American should be proud and happy on Juneteenth, when we finally (after 150 years) started acting on the empty words in our founding documents.
Yes, you should be, and that's all the more reason to tie the celebration explicitly to the defeat of the Confederates. The Appomattox surrender* is ideal for that purpose, because every American under every curriculum presumably knows of it already; and furthermore an Appomattox Day would at once appropriate a day sacralized by racists without appropriating a day African-Americans (I assume) sacralized for themselves.**
Yet further, the event can be tied explicitly to celebration of victory in a righteous war, and therefore to celebration of the (loyal, constitution-abiding, multiracial, multiethnic) Union armed forces; and yet further the current armed forces can be compelled (by executive order alone, without Congressional friction), to participate loudly in that celebration, thus putting Republican opposition to the holiday in tension with their own sacralization of the military; and at the same time forcing the armed forces to expunge more fully from themselves any identification with the Confederates (cf. ongoing renaming of bases).
*Though I would favor Durham, because (1) Lee (known for commiting treason and owning slaves) deserves deflating, (2) Sherman (known for cursing war and staying out of politics) deserves inflating, and (3) no-one should have to remember how to spell Appomattox.
**Though I see no reason you can't do both. I don't know what most African-Americans think about the appropriation, and you work too much anyway.
60: But we don't celebrate January 8th.
Mossy, a-men and pass the ammunition! I would *love* an Appomatox Day! But have you thought about the consequences for flooding of our built infrastructure? And IIUC salty tears are more corrosive than fresh water, so there's that, too. Requires a lot of thought, eh?
P.S. God, it would be so great, and the shrieks of put-upon White supremacists would be heard throughout the land. But sadly, I don't think White America is ready for it.
56. So you haven't seen any of the Black pundits and spokespersons who are pissed off by "their" holiday being spread thinly over the whole country/populace?
Mossy, I don't see how I was being condescending. A commenter tries to equate a holiday commemorating the end of *slavery* with St. Patrick's Day? That deserves rebuke. In a country where Black Americans were equals and had been for a few generations, maybe he'd have a point. In this country? It's bullshit.
66: No, but I'm sure you'll come with receipts, and they won't be, y'know, a bunch a paid shills for the New Confederacy. But also, as you surely should know, there is a diversity of opinion on this subject, and the preponderance of opinion is that making Juneteenth a federal holiday is a good thing.
67: That's exactly what the Hapsburgs want you to believe.
Poking around, for every black person online I found unhappy about the nationalization of Juneteenth, I'd see three or four cautiously positive about it, if tempered by it being only symbolic change. Talk is cheap, etc. Anyway, if black people were largely against it, that would've pissed off do-gooder liberal types, and between the two it would've been too damaging for Democratic pols to follow through with.
68: You spent one sentence pointing out the error and three or four insulting a good faith commenter of long standing; and not merely insulting him, but explicitly calling him a bad person.
And this subthread reminds me why I make it a rule never to read Murthy's comments. (With this gratuitous, if true, insult, reducing myself to his level and thus I hope escaping a counter-charge of condescension on my own part.)
More productively, speaking of possible appropriation: thoughts?
(With this gratuitous, if true, insult, reducing myself to his level and thus I hope escaping a counter-charge of condescension on my own part.)
Murthy is sometimes testy, but often well worth reading.
Mossy: you're really unable to see that this "anything that celebrates a good thing that happened to Black people is necessarily an ethnic thing, necessarily about identity politics" is standard right-wing bullshit? Really?
Just saw a Juneteenth commercial from Ford.
I really hate the folk understanding of the 3/5 clause.
I will say that I thought the analogy of Juneteenth to St, Patrick's clanged a bit. And, you know, it's possible to be both Jewish and Italian.
Whatever various people want to say about it, we're committed to nationalizing the thing now. It's up to us as a culture to decide what to do with it.
Gentile or Jew, Cristoffa Corombo of Genoa was no Italian.*
77: I agree it clangs a bit; I deny that the comparison is absurd or can be dismissed out of hand. Anglo-American plantation slavery was largely invented in, and initially inflicted upon, Ireland; I leave the Potatoes to Mr. Swift; the Irish in the United States found it necessary to critical-race-theory their way across the color line; all this happened, not coincidentally, over much the same period as Anglo-American enslavement and segregation of Africans; and produced an Irish-American population which today amounts to nearly 70% that of African Americans.
None of this is to say that Irish and African suffering were identical in kind or in scale, but that they significantly overlap and are definitely, likely profitably, comparable. (Nor is this to say that St. Patrick's day as actually practiced actually reflects the history -- I don't know, but assume it doesn't; but as pointed out above, there is little reason to think Juneteenth will be any different on that measure.)
*Which, to loop back to and re-up 73, makes me wonder what the Hispanos of NM make of him.
Wow is that wrongheaded. "How The Irish Became White" as a book title has a lot to answer for, in terms of misleading people: for one thing, the suggestion that the Irish were not at all times treated as white is very far from meaning that they were treated in the same way Black people were. Not being at the very apex of the system of White supremacy is not the same as being at the lowest level.
Furthermore, while the British treatment of Ireland was horrifying in many ways, there absolutely was not a system of plantation slavery in Ireland, much less one founded on a putative racial distinction between slaves and free persons. What on earth are you talking about?
not the same as
I invite you to read what I actually wrote.
there absolutely was not a system of plantation slavery in Ireland
I invite you, first, to read what I actually wrote, and second to take up that argument with the generations of historians my links point to.
"Anglo-American plantation slavery was... initially inflicted upon, Ireland."
Those are your words, and they aren't true.
And purporting to support any argument with a link to a search on an academic's name without identifying what they have said on the argument is nonsense. If you mean to say that Jane Ohlmeyer, who is certainly a distinguished academic, takes the position of yours I've quoted above, you should make that claim. If you're not saying that, I'm not clear on what we're supposed to take from your link.
You wouldn't be as aware of this Mossy, but in 21st century US culture, people talking about Irish 'slavery' are mostly white supremacists, seeking to minimize the horrors -- and ongoing relevance -- of Black slavery. Some holes aren't worth digging, even if you're trying for a well, actually.
I have no idea what 78.1 means. Was the guy not from a generations old Genoese family?
I think of the colonization of Ireland as the precursor to the dispossession of Indigenous people in the British North America. There was some enslavement, but nothing like Spanish America, which wasn't invented by Protestants in Ireland.
The Brits didn't invent the Asiento -- they just fought a war, inter alia, to win it.
82: I do make that claim, as is obvious from my placement of the links.
81: Anglo-American plantation slavery occurred across ~400 years and multiple continents. It is a vast range of stuff, not limited to chattel slavery or to classic antebellum-style plantations. The beginnings of that stuff are largely in Ireland. Again, I invite you to learn to read.
So you're using Anglo-American plantation slavery in a private sense that doesn't include chattel slavery or plantations? Fascinating, but uninformative.
75, 77. Sorry if it clanged. My point was that St. Patrick's Day as celebrated here in the US was originally an ethnic, political, "identity politics" sort of thing. Not so much any more, even in MA: it's a fun day off with green beer. (Columbus Day is similar but was actually promoted by Italian-American organizations who wanted to show Italians had "arrived.")
Juneteenth will probably end up with a similar trajectory. I'm not sure that's great outcome, aside from the food being better.
83. I think Mossy's point might be that there was no "Italy" back then, except as a geographical expression.
83.2: It means he wasn't Italian, he was Genoese. Effectively no-one identified as Italian at the time.
83.1: Fuck US culture. The commenters on this blog are capable of digging wells.
84: AIUI the Brits (or English, mostly) learned as much from their failures in Ireland as anything else. They could never get enough settlers, so they ended up just stealing the land and squeezing the tenants (Sound familiar?). When they get to the Caribbean they barely try to bring settlers, they go straight to slavery; regular farming never turns much profit in Ireland, so in the Americas they thrash around until they find high-margin commodities; the individuals, companies, structures setting up in the Americas are deeply cross-connected with the planting of Ireland; all the enterprises, and the Irish wars, are imbricated with the overall struggle with Spain; the Irish project is tied up also in confessional conflicts and attempted cultural genocide, various parts of which continue across the ocean.
86: I write "not limited to". You read "doesn't include". Learn to read.
89.3: The underlying point, to be clear, being that the British, and proto-Americans, victimized a hell of a lot of Irish people in the process of mastering imperialism. I'll concede "Anglo-American plantation slavery" was the wrong choice of words to introduce all that in this forum.
91: CM is a typo for MC?
And sure, your underlying point, if you state it in those terms, is fine.
89 I was responding to DaveLMA's comment, in which he used Italian as we currently use the word. You are being aggressively pedantic.
And while Chris might not have said "Italian" when asked, Italy did exist as a concept, even if not a formal nation. Kind of like white, back when people from Ireland were treated as second class citizens in the US, but never, ever, with the same disabilities as non-white people.
89 I was responding to DaveLMA's comment, in which he used Italian as we currently use the word. You are being aggressively pedantic.
And while Chris might not have said "Italian" when asked, Italy did exist as a concept, even if not a formal nation. Kind of like white, back when people from Ireland were treated as second class citizens in the US, but never, ever, with the same disabilities as non-white people.
92.1: Yes.
92.2: Comity.
93: Aggresive pedantry is literally my job.
93.1: The Colombus bit was intended in jest.
91: For an idea of the headspace that led me to that mistake, in Lecture 1 here, 24:52 Ohlmeyer quotes Newton: "Ireland is one of the English plantations, and though it has changed the title of lordship to that of kingdom, yet it still continues annexed to the crown of England like the other plantations". If your head is in Stuart Britain "plantation" stands in essentially for empire. Contemporaries seem to use the term to cover in different contexts settlement, conquest, cattle theft, genocide, cultural genocide, land deed fraud, piracy, slavery, debt peonage, etc etc etc.
Obligatory Columbus link: https://youtu.be/cbbMIg-Aw8E
96 and I can't believe it hadn't already been posted
93.1: From the point of view of the Italian-Americans who were promoting Columbus Day, he was Italian. Sure, he was born in Genoa, but he probably had to actually learn Italian, as Genoa and environs had its own dialect.
93.2: Italy certainly existed as a concept, but not that many people back then thought of themselves as "Italian." (By coincidence, I'm actually re-reading Barbara Tuchman's "The March of Folly," which has a nice long section about the papacy and Italian internecine warfare among the various towns, regions, with predatory powers looking on. Contemporaneous with Columbus.)
Pwned by 96, which is the final word on Columbus.
This is somehow related to the fact that I recently discovered my paternal paternal* great grandfather was born in Palermo in 1859 so about 2 years before the March 1861 date he'd need to be born for me to qualify for an Italian passport.
There's still a possibility with my paternal maternal great grandfather and with my maternal great grandfather.
*if that makes sense.
Palermo is a geographical expression. My maternal maternal grandparents were born in Sicily, but not in any place anyone ever heard of (or that I can remember). I suspect the village had a community-wide speech impediment because none of my grandma's words appear to be used by anyone else.
Bibi having to leave the official residence of the head of government because he's not the head of government is the real oppression.
Ekranoplan content: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-england-hampshire-57483048
All sorts of interesting things can be said about the trio of decisions from the US Supreme Court today. One thing that struck me, though, is how in the patent case Roberts waxed poetic about the early years of the Republic -- try as one might, the fact that a judge who noted systemic defects in a 1826 patent case had long before that been Aaron Burr's second in the duel with Hamilton is just not relevant to the case, and it's clear that Roberts is just telling us that he's besotted -- while in the antitrust case Kav waxed poetic about college sports:
To be sure, the NCAA and its member colleges maintain important traditions that have become part of the fabric of America--game days in Tuscaloosa and South Bend; the packed gyms in Storrs and Durham; the women's and men's lacrosse championships on Memorial Day weekend; track and field meets in Eugene; the spring softball and baseball World Series in Oklahoma City and Omaha; the list goes on. But those traditions alone cannot justify the NCAA's decision to build a massive money-raising enterprise on the backs of student athletes who are not fairly compensated.
100: Really! lurid just discovered a week ago that, because my paternal-paternal-paternal great-great-grandfather was born in a certain tiny grand duchy in the Low Countries, I and our kid might actually qualify for grand ducal passports by sole virtue of bearing his last name. (Patriarchy, how does it work?) I have a phone call today with a society who processes these things to find out if it can possibly be real (and will be pretending to be a man, to match my documents).
107: That sounds like a slight variation on diploma mills, doesn't it? Unless you're saying it leads to a passport for that nation-state/the EU.
Oh wait, if you mean a particular tiny grand duchy that is still a recognized state, never mind.
109: Yes, it's the extant grand duchy, although you're right that a passport factory for lapsed grand duchies sounds like a good business model.
makes me wonder what the Hispanos of NM make of him.
Hm, interesting question. I think traditionally people have probably had a generally positive view of him, but throughout Spanish America he doesn't have the same central position in national consciousness that he gained in Anglo-American consciousness once we appropriated him. That appropriation was significantly boosted by Italian-American identity politics but it actually goes back much further, especially to the late eighteenth century when elites in the newly independent US were casting about for a national identity and history separate from Britain.
(Not sure what any of this has to do with Mary Colter. I don't think many people anywhere would consider that kind of architectural influence to be appropriative in a bad way. If it is, the problem goes well beyond her.)
104: Now *that* is what I am here for. Would 300kph make it competitive with, say, air routes across the North Sea?
112.2: I see no problem myself, I was curious what the locals thought; aesthetically I like the look of it, but wonder how it sits in the landscape.
113: How often is the North Sea flat enough for a ground effect craft?
It's been a long time since I was at Grand Canyon, and I'm not sure if I've ever been to that part at all. (I have been to Hovenweep more recently, though, and can confirm the similarity to the towers there.) In general Colter's work is highly regarded and thought to fit well with the context.
What happens if you don't return a rental car for two days? What about two hours? Asking for a friend.
Usually you get charge some sort of "standard rate" either hourly or daily. The tricky thing though is almost always you've booked at some kind of discounted rate and the "standard rate" is higher. It's possible that some more serious penalty kicks in after a certain amount of time, but I'm not sure. I'd call and attempt to extend which is almost certainly cheaper.
Thanks. New reservations are like $300 a day, which I'm afraid of getting stuck with.