Detroit is a better tourist destination than Chicago (Manhattan, Newark: high school, live)

[Tex?Il?]

Originally Posted by Brssplr

While I certainly agree that Detroit is a poor choice over Chicago, I see other poor choices in the list as well, namely Rio over Buenos Aires, and Houston over Austin. That being said, I do like that he talked up Portland, but not so much that it's to the expense of Vancouver.

Care to share your reasons as to why Rio over Buenos Aires or Houston over Austin are poor choices? I'm not disagreeing - I'm just curious.

[ChiNaan]

Originally Posted by Tex?Il?

Care to share your reasons as to why Rio over Buenos Aires or Houston over Austin are poor choices? I'm not disagreeing - I'm just curious.

Houston over Austin is as silly as Detroit over Chicago, for people who have spent time in them. Even the people I've known who have actually lived in Houston don't rank it over Austin. Houston is more humid, more sprawling, far more conservative, and less hip in nearly every way imaginable. Austin is gradually turning into more of a generic big city in recent decades, but it has a long way to go before it becomes as bad as Houston. I'm not sure it ever will, even if it gets as big as Houston, because a trace of its roots will always be there.

[Tex?Il?]

Originally Posted by ChiNaan

Houston over Austin is as silly as Detroit over Chicago, for people who have spent time in them. Even the people I've known who have actually lived in Houston don't rank it over Austin. Houston is more humid, more sprawling, far more conservative, and less hip in nearly every way imaginable. Austin is gradually turning into more of a generic big city in recent decades, but it has a long way to go before it becomes as bad as Houston. I'm not sure it ever will, even if it gets as big as Houston, because a trace of its roots will always be there.

There are lot of hip, Bohemian neighborhoods in the inner loop of Houston: Westheimer, Montrose, Houston Hts, Rice Village, etc. Sure, pound for pound per capita, its not as hip, but given that Houston is way bigger, it has something for everyone.

Not that I'm defending Houston, but I never understood why people define a city like Houston or Dallas by the entire metro area with emphasis on the surrounding sprawling, sterile suburbs, even when there are hip bohemian enclaves in the inner city, but Chicago is judged by the core city, suggesting that the surrounding suburbs don't in any way define Chicago, while at the same time people 30 miles from the loop identify with Chicago.

Chicagoland is more sprawling and conservative than Minneapolis or Madison, even if the core of Chicago is a world class urban experience.

Maybe the difference is that one can live in Chicago and not have any exposure to the less hip, more conservative suburbs, whereas Houstons inner loop, is not so self-contained and one is going to have to interact with the surrounding suburbs because a higher portion of the jobs are in the surrounding areas? Or maybe people move to Houston specifically for the ability to buy a huge house because of the low cost of living, and therefore stay in the suburbs and don't know about the hip, bohemian enclaves?? Who knows.

But the logic of the analogy of Austin is to Houston what Madison/Minneapolis is to Chicago does make sense the majority of Chicagolanders still live in the sprawling, not hip suburbs.

[Irishtom29]

Originally Posted by Tex?Il?

There are lot of hip, Bohemian neighborhoods in the inner loop of Houston:

You mean I can get roast duck and dumplings in Houston? I thought the Bohemians in Texas were out in a couple of towns along I-35, I stopped at a bakery in one of those towns and the kolackis were big fluffy things like sweet rolls, not very good.

You know, when towns like Houston have entire neighborhoods that are "bohemian" you gotta wonder if nowadays being "hip" isn't just another way of being conventional.

[ChiNaan]

Originally Posted by Tex?Il?

Not that I'm defending Houston,

Could have fooled me.

Originally Posted by Tex?Il?

Maybe the difference is that one can live in Chicago and not have any exposure to the less hip, more conservative suburbs, whereas Houstons inner loop, is not so self-contained and one is going to have to interact with the surrounding suburbs because a higher portion of the jobs are in the surrounding areas? Or maybe people move to Houston specifically for the ability to buy a huge house because of the low cost of living, and therefore stay in the suburbs and don't know about the hip, bohemian enclaves?? Who knows.

Yep, I think it's all of that and more. I don't know if the numbers support this (though I would guess they do), but in terms of overall "feel" of influence, Houston and Dallas seem to be much more about the suburbs than Chicago and Austin. I'm well aware of Houston's inner loop, and I like it, but it seems like such a tiny portion of the city, almost like a little fortress surrounded by endless sprawl. Austin's downtown, by comparison, dominates the culture of the city. (Not as much as it used to, but still far more than Houston.) Everyone I've known who has lived "in Dallas" (which is a large percentage of people I knew in high school and college) and all but one who has lived "in Houston" has really lived in a suburb, and is conservative, religious, in a traditional marriage/family with children, a big cookie cutter house, and SUVs. There's nothing wrong with that if that's your thing, but it doesn't exactly make for much of a tourist destination, IMO, and there is good reason they're not known as such.

[ChiNaan]

Originally Posted by Irishtom29

You mean I can get roast duck and dumplings in Houston? I thought the Bohemians in Texas were out in a couple of towns along I-35, I stopped at a bakery in one of those towns and the kolackis were big fluffy things like sweet rolls, not very good.

I'm pretty sure he meant small-b bohemian, but that made me laugh.

If you hadn't made the connection, by the way, the town you're talking about with the kolaches on I-35 is West, TX, which is where the fertilizer plant explosion just happened. I've stopped for them there, and I think they're great. Based on your spelling and your thinking they weren't good, I wonder if you were expecting Polish kolackys like the ones that are all over the Chicago area rather than Czech kolaches. Kolaches are in fact supposed to be leaven, fluffy sweet rolls, not flaky crusty things like the Polish ones.

[Irishtom29]

Originally Posted by ChiNaan

Based on your spelling and your thinking they weren't good, I wonder if you were expecting Polish kolackys like the ones that are all over the Chicago area rather than Czech kolaches. Kolaches are in fact supposed to be leaven, fluffy sweet rolls, not flaky crusty things like the Polish ones.

From when I was a kid we used to get kolackis, however you spell them, from Bohemian bakeries on 22nd St. The small crusty kind, sometimes round and sometimes folded but not as big and fluffy as the Texian ones. We used to eat at Klas and Old Prague often too, my Old Man grew up at 22nd and Millard and loves Bohemian chow.

[ChiNaan]

Originally Posted by Irishtom29

You know, when towns like Houston have entire neighborhoods that are "bohemian" you gotta wonder if nowadays being "hip" isn't just another way of being conventional.

Any city as big as Houston or Chicago has just about every kind of neighborhood. Even places like Oklahoma City and Albuquerque have some semblance of bohemian enclaves. The difference is that in some cities they influence or even dominate the overall culture, while in other cities they exist in opposition to a more conventional/conservative overall culture.

[ChiNaan]

Originally Posted by Irishtom29

From when I was a kid we used to get kolackis, however you spell them, from Bohemian bakeries on 22nd St. The small crusty kind. We used to eat at Klas and Old Prague often too, my Old Man grew up at 22nd and Millard and loves Bohemian chow.

Interesting. I've always known the small crusty kind to be Polish and the bready kind to be Czech. As I understand it, though, immigrants who called themselves Bohemian in the U.S. (like the ones who settled Pilsen) were not the same ethnic group as the ones who called themselves Czech (like the ones who settled in West, TX), despite Bohemia making up the bulk of the Czech Republic, so that might explain the difference in the pastries. Or maybe the style just evolved differently post-settlement in Texas than Chicago.

[Irishtom29]

Maybe they're Moravians out there. I've seen various types of kolackis around here but never like he ones I had in Texas. Like you said, maybe it's regional. Maybe a Bohemian or Pole here can pipe in.

The Germans around Fredericksburg and New Brunfels Texas have an interesting history, it's said they even got along with the Comanches, if true they were the ONLY people other than the Kiowas who could make that boast. I had good German chow in Fredericksburg and noticed that the German settled areas of the Hill Country hadn't gone to ecological Hell like the Anglo areas.

The Germans weren't slaveholders and during the War of the Rebellion many were Unionists and were given a very hard time by the Anglos; massacres and lynchings and such, a shameful part of Texas history (which is shameful enough anyway).