REVIEW, ROYAL PRINCESS (SO FAR)

My mother always told me to start out any constructive criticism with a positive.

Likewise, years later a writing instructor of mine also gave that very sage advice.

++++++++++++++

I am midway through an eleven night cruise which goes from Los Angeles to Alaska's Inside Passage. Stops include Juneau, Skagway and Ketchikan...and originally included an extended stay in Victoria, British Columbia. (A lot more about that momentarily.)

Our stops in Ketchikan and Juneau, after three very long days at sea, were spectacular and fun. The weather cooperated for the most part and the excursions we selected - on through the ship, and one on our own - were full of adventure and wonderful sights and people. More about one and possibly both these excursions in the future.

The shipboard experience has been a mixed bag. On the plus side the cabin steward is excellent. His name is Rene and he is a beacon of light every morning and afternoon, always cheery and ready with a smile, and the cabin is well cleaned and appointed after he gets through.

Likewise, we can strongly compliment the ship's entertainers. The musicians of the ship's band are excellent, and feature not only terrific showcase talents, but have demonstrated considerable strength in jazz, which to us is the ultimate measure of a musician's chops.

The production show, entitled Encore, was spectacular by regular show standards, above and beyond shipboard experiences. The singers were uniformly excellent and the musicians, as noted, exceptional. The set was impressive, and well used choreographically.

So...kudos to the Royal Princess and Princess lines.

Now the bad stuff, and it's bad.

First, the cancellation of one of our four stopovers. 25% of the onshore activities. It deserves mention not only for the loss of the visit, but the cruise line's reaction to it.

Apparently at some point in the recent past a bit of equipment was lost at sea during a storm. It impacted the scheduled completion of a new cruise ship dock in Victoria, BC, the only international destination of the trip. (This becomes important a little below.)

Things happen, and I am understanding. Particularly if the cruise line acknowledges the failure and moves to make amends. In this case, nothing. Crickets. The Captain explained the issue, but no apparent attempt was made to reroute the ship. (Vancouver and Seattle are both easily available ports and can accommodate a large ship like the Royal Princess.) Nor was there any mention of simply tender the visitors ashore. The designation was canceled, with little more comment from the cruise line.

Well, not exactly.

For some reason, completely unexplained, we are still putting in to the port. The dock prevents them from allowing any of the guests to go ashore, but we're still putting in. My guess it's solely for the purpose of operating the casino, but it's strictly a guess.

A cynical disservice to the passengers if that's the case. For some reason - despite the complete blockage of access to Canadian land - we passengers are still being forced to file customs documents for the Canadian government.

Which, of course, means we have to endure customs when we return to Los Angeles, despite the fact that the cruise line forbids us to leave the ship in the sole international port.

By comparison, if you're flying domestically and land in an airport strictly for transit, you do not go through customs. You may even change planes, but you will still not be required to go through customs, even if that stopover is international. In fact, that would constitute a HIGHLY unusual decision by the airline.

So, again, I must conclude that the sole reason for the ship to dock is to be able to open the casino. The disservice and inconvenience to guests is secondary to the profit motive, it appears. The same results could have been received had the ship detoured to Vancouver or tendered us into Victoria, but our pleasure was evidently never considered. Or was considered and discarded.

Unacceptable. As of yet no one on the ship has given me a satisfactory response.

Which brings me to my second major criticism (I gave two examples of good things above): the demeanor of a number of the staff, particularly in the restaurants, is surprisingly grumpy. I have seen a waiter roll his eyes after another table in one restaurant asked for something. The same waiter seemed abrupt with us when taking the order and delivering the food.

A woman behind the coffee service counter on Deck 6, who I presumed to be the supervisor, was distinctly angry with an elderly guest who accidentally spilled cream once counter. He younger companion tried to jest to lighten the mood and received an icy stare as a result.

A third example was when my wife and I arrived at the main dining room for dinner our second night. We had selected the anytime dining option. The maitre 'd "instructed" us that we were entering on the wrong side (there are entries on both sides of the ship) and we had to go back out, cross the ship and enter from THAT side.

Okay, fine. It could've been handled more pleasantly, but when we presented ourselves on the starboard (and correct) entry we were escorted to a table not fifty feet from the port-side entrance to the restaurant. Absurdity in action.

In each case the staff were inconvenienced by the guests. I get that. But the worst possible result would be for the guests to feel that they WERE putting the hosts out. It made us, and several other passengers, feel unwelcome. And as I have talked to other passengers I'm finding that the experience is not uncommon. One woman remarked this was her eighth Princess cruise and was by far the rudest restaurant staff she'd ever encountered.

Sadly, this was our first. And may be our last, should things not improve dramatically.

Stay tuned.