Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I consider River North part of the loop - considering it's right there.
How is River North part of the Loop? There is a river in between it and the Loop. It would be one thing if you said you consider the South Loop part of the Loop, but River North is definitely not part of the Loop especially when there's a river between the two of them.
Quote:
LA has a distinct bohemian feel in Hollywood, Los Feliz, Venice Beach, and you can find it basically everywhere in between.
I'll give you Venice Beach for being a lot more distinct, but Hollywood? Come on - I was there a few weeks ago in a lot of areas and it there wasn't anything special in the way of being "Bohemian." Venice Beach is cool but it also tries too hard to be something it once was.
You can't say that Chicago/NYC gets boring outside of the the city center compared to LA, when LA has a boring city center to begin with. I know DTLA is improving but not remotely on par with NYC, Chicago, or a number of other downtowns. And to say it's bohemian is a bit of a stretch. I also don't see what's so bohemian about East LA, or Compton, or really anywhere that isn't West LA ETA- and some of the areas to the North of DT like Silver Lake and Echo Park.
On a metro level, there's a kernel of truth to your statement. South Pasadena was the only suburb I actually really enjoyed living in as a 20 something. LA has a number of suburbs that have lots of stuff going on for young people, more so than Chicago I think and maybe NYC too though not as familiar. The problem with LA is that a lot of people tend to live in a bubble, and for good reason. Even something like meeting a friend in Santa Monica for dinner during the week or going to the beach on a Saturday was such a hassle between the traffic and parking. I found most of my life centered around Pasadena/the SGV and I think that's how life is for a lot of people who live in the LA area, at least for those who do not want to spend their lives sitting in cars. So sure there may be a lot going on in a large geographical area, but I do wonder how much of the populace actually takes advantage of it given the prohibitive factors mentioned above. At least in cities like NYC and Chicago, you can actually get around via public transportation much more easily and are more easily able to access different neighborhoods.
I have to disagree. For someone who grew up in the far NW suburbs and lived in Oak Park for a couple years and went down into the city for social functions, and have lived in LA the last three years, I have to put my two cents in.
I think because NY and Chicago are so "urban" with people getting around through public transit and never going out to the suburbs because they are largely sleepy bedroom communities that are more for families, that that kind of urban lifestyle is more more "in a bubble". In fact it was one of my major issues with social life in Chicagoland. I lived in Oak Park, and would get asked by people in LP,LV,WP,DT, etc. "why I don't live in the "city"".
In greater LA, there might be some people that live in a bubble (South Bay beach towns especially), and sure, maybe a slight majority of ones' social life might be centered around one of the clusters, but if you get to know the roads and routes, one can still manage to get around. I live in Pasadena, and would meet for a hike in Griffith Park in the evening, meet someone for a swing dance class near the Beverly Center, or even meet with a young adult group for a social night at a church I go to in Santa Monica. On a weeknight. (not all three things in the same night)! And I was not the only one to do this.
You just have to know where the good parking is (many garages are 90 minutes free), where alternate routes are (surface streets are often faster, the timing, etc. But yes, you do have to do a little bit of homework. Its certainly not for everyone.
Also, one more thing, I love South Pasadena, but I would not characterize it as a place for a 20 something. Pasadena proper centered on Old Town yes, as it feels like a small CITY. South Pasadena is more like a quaint, small TOWN.
Also, parts of the valley (North Hollywood/Studio City) as well as NELA between DTLA and Pasadena (Highland Park, Eagle Rock), and virtually everything between DT and the beach (including Koreatown, Hollywood, Melrose, Westwood, Culver City, Santa Monica, Venice, etc. etc. South Bay is very singles oriented but they are more "in a bubble" as well as Long Beach.
But like I said, its not for everyone. I like it however, and I am still enjoying after three years. However I love coming back home an visiting family and old friends, like I am as I type this. I just went down to Daley Plaza for the Christkindlmarket. I love that place, and go every year. Just wish there was snow on the ground and that it wasn't raining! raining in the high 30s is ick.
Strange statement considering you were against the "yuppie" neighborhoods for the longest time and in favor of Pilsen or Albany Park. You would tell visitors those neighborhoods weren't the real city and that they should avoid them. With the exception of Chinatown, those neighborhoods are interchangeable. Big 10 strongholds, craft breweries, wear your Cubs or Bears gear on gameday type places.
Wicker Park is hipster turned yipster, and now you're impressed with it?
First of all, I've always liked Wicker Park, even if it's undergone gentrification. There's still stuff to do that people who don't like BS like Starbucks can handle. There is almost nothing "Big 10 Stronghold" about it outside of a few places. If you think that, then you're completely blind. Tell that to the people who hang out at places like Flat Iron, Double Door, Subterranean, Myopic Books, Reckless Records, etc. Now it's probably "more Big 10" than it was 15 years ago, but it's still not a Big 10 Stronghold. I can't even tell you how many people who live on the north side actually think that Wicker Park is still full on hipster.
Second of all, I can't believe you think that a place like Wicker Park and Lakeview are interchangeable. Ridiculous. WP has gentrified, but most of it is nothing like Lakeview. Not all gentrified neighborhoods are the same.
Third of all, I like Albany Park for different reasons. I don't like it because I can go and have a beer or whatever there. If someone was looking for a hip neighborhood, I would never recommend it.
Last edited by marothisu; 12-22-2014 at 06:48 PM..
In fact it was one of my major issues with social life in Chicagoland. I lived in Oak Park, and would get asked by people in LP,LV,WP,DT, etc. "why I don't live in the "city"".
In greater LA, there might be some people that live in a bubble (South Bay beach towns especially), and sure, maybe a slight majority of ones' social life might be centered around one of the clusters, but if you get to know the roads and routes, one can still manage to get around. I live in Pasadena, and would meet for a hike in Griffith Park in the evening, meet someone for a swing dance class near the Beverly Center, or even meet with a young adult group for a social night at a church I go to in Santa Monica. On a weeknight. (not all three things in the same night)! And I was not the only one to do this.
You just have to know where the good parking is (many garages are 90 minutes free), where alternate routes are (surface streets are often faster, the timing, etc. But yes, you do have to do a little bit of homework. Its certainly not for everyone.
Most people living in Chicago's core or north/west neighborhoods dont own cars, or rarely use them. In LA, the concept of relying on public transit or cycling for day to day life is foreign. You are comparing two different lifestyles. I wouldnt say Chicagoans are in a "bubble". But when it takes an hour+ to get from the north side to Oak Park on the CTA, no Im not likely going to regularly date someone from there, etc.
First of all, I've always liked Wicker Park, even if it's undergone gentrification. There's still stuff to do that people who don't like BS like Starbucks can handle. There is almost nothing "Big 10 Stronghold" about it outside of a few places. If you think that, then you're completely blind. Tell that to the people who hang out at places like Flat Iron, Double Door, Subterranean, Myopic Books, Reckless Records, etc. Now it's probably "more Big 10" than it was 15 years ago, but it's still not a Big 10 Stronghold. I can't even tell you how many people who live on the north side actually think that Wicker Park is still full on hipster.
Second of all, I can't believe you think that a place like Wicker Park and Lakeview are interchangeable. Ridiculous. WP has gentrified, but most of it is nothing like Lakeview.
WP has definitely gotten more "bro-ey" for lack of a better term. Its past gentrification and is now firmly in yuppie territory. There is still still somewhat of an artsy bent, but overall its becoming more homogenous and higher income.
But yes, if you are comparing Clark Street on a Friday with Milwaukee on a Friday...clearly its not the same thing. But the lines are starting to blur.
WP has definitely gotten more "bro-ey" for lack of a better term. Its past gentrification and is now firmly in yuppie territory. There is still still somewhat of an artsy bent, but overall its becoming more homogenous and higher income.
But yes, if you are comparing Clark Street on a Friday with Milwaukee on a Friday...clearly its not the same thing. But the lines are starting to blur.
It is more bro-ey than it used to be, but it's still a FAR cry from "big 10 stronghold" and "just like Lakeview and Lincoln Park." It's going to be a long while before you can't tell the difference between Wrigleyville and Milwaukee Ave, if ever. It still bends towards artist even if it's gentrified.
If you (anyone) can't tell the difference between WP and Lakeview, then you're blind.
I have to disagree. For someone who grew up in the far NW suburbs and lived in Oak Park for a couple years and went down into the city for social functions, and have lived in LA the last three years, I have to put my two cents in.
I think because NY and Chicago are so "urban" with people getting around through public transit and never going out to the suburbs because they are largely sleepy bedroom communities that are more for families, that that kind of urban lifestyle is more more "in a bubble". In fact it was one of my major issues with social life in Chicagoland. I lived in Oak Park, and would get asked by people in LP,LV,WP,DT, etc. "why I don't live in the "city"".
That's fine, we can agree to disagree. I'm not saying that people don't create bubble lifestyles for themselves, but it's one thing when it's your personality and it's another thing when it's external factors that influence it. I never really saw myself as a "bubble" person until I lived in the LA area - one positive thing is that I really got to know the SGV and had a cultural experience 99% of people don't get to experience. But I think people can more easily move around in Chicago due in large part to the comprehensive public transit. Sure they may be living in a "bubble" if they don't get out of the city, but the city is so large I'd hardly call it a bubble the way smaller nodes are in the LA metro.
Quote:
In greater LA, there might be some people that live in a bubble (South Bay beach towns especially), and sure, maybe a slight majority of ones' social life might be centered around one of the clusters, but if you get to know the roads and routes, one can still manage to get around. I live in Pasadena, and would meet for a hike in Griffith Park in the evening, meet someone for a swing dance class near the Beverly Center, or even meet with a young adult group for a social night at a church I go to in Santa Monica. On a weeknight. (not all three things in the same night)! And I was not the only one to do this.
You just have to know where the good parking is (many garages are 90 minutes free), where alternate routes are (surface streets are often faster, the timing, etc. But yes, you do have to do a little bit of homework. Its certainly not for everyone.
I'm not saying I never left South Pasadena - I definitely did get out because all of my friends and family lived to the west. But it's more of a production than just hopping on a train and yes, you do have to do your homework. Granted, I lived in San Diego for 4 years prior to LA. San Diego, while plagued with its own traffic issues, is MUCH easier to get around in because it's so much smaller, but one is no less reliant on the car in LA than one is in SD. I hated that I could rarely go out with friends in WeHo because I had to worry about getting there, getting back, or parking my car if I stayed with a friend, because most of WeHo has overnight parking restrictions. Stuff like that I guess sort of detracted from my ability to really access what I wanted to access in LA. I'm not saying it can't be done, but it's more difficult than in less car-centric cities all else being equal, IMO.
Ironically, downtown never seemed hard to get to from S. Pasadena. The 110 was my favorite freeway when I lived out there because it was mostly so much clearer than everywhere else. But DT was never a big destination for me besides work.
Quote:
Also, one more thing, I love South Pasadena, but I would not characterize it as a place for a 20 something. Pasadena proper centered on Old Town yes, as it feels like a small CITY. South Pasadena is more like a quaint, small TOWN.
Well you are right on that, and I should have clarified - I liked South Pas because it was easily accessible to Pasadena even though you're right that it's a pretty sleepy area in comparison. I really love Pasadena and would definitely still live in that area if I ever move back despite my gripes.
That's fine, we can agree to disagree. I'm not saying that people don't create bubble lifestyles for themselves, but it's one thing when it's your personality and it's another thing when it's external factors that influence it. I never really saw myself as a "bubble" person until I lived in the LA area - one positive thing is that I really got to know the SGV and had a cultural experience 99% of people don't get to experience. But I think people can more easily move around in Chicago due in large part to the comprehensive public transit. Sure they may be living in a "bubble" if they don't get out of the city, but the city is so large I'd hardly call it a bubble the way smaller nodes are in the LA metro.
I'm not saying I never left South Pasadena - I definitely did get out because all of my friends and family lived to the west. But it's more of a production than just hopping on a train and yes, you do have to do your homework. Granted, I lived in San Diego for 4 years prior to LA. San Diego, while plagued with its own traffic issues, is MUCH easier to get around in because it's so much smaller, but one is no less reliant on the car in LA than one is in SD. I hated that I could rarely go out with friends in WeHo because I had to worry about getting there, getting back, or parking my car if I stayed with a friend, because most of WeHo has overnight parking restrictions. Stuff like that I guess sort of detracted from my ability to really access what I wanted to access in LA. I'm not saying it can't be done, but it's more difficult than in less car-centric cities all else being equal, IMO.
Ironically, downtown never seemed hard to get to from S. Pasadena. The 110 was my favorite freeway when I lived out there because it was mostly so much clearer than everywhere else. But DT was never a big destination for me besides work.
Well you are right on that, and I should have clarified - I liked South Pas because it was easily accessible to Pasadena even though you're right that it's a pretty sleepy area in comparison. I really love Pasadena and would definitely still live in that area if I ever move back despite my gripes.
Fair enough. I guess I don't use public transit enough. To me, it still feels like an "alternative" to driving, something to show my commitment to the carbon footprint. Almost like a form of entertainment (not really) but it does feel more like "production" than driving, but again that's just me.
That is true about WeHo. Its one of my least favorite centers of activity because of lack of parking (and lack of public transit). One of the big reasons I generally prefer the "east side" (downtown, Silver Lake, Echo Park, Koreatown, etc.) to the westside.
First of all, I've always liked Wicker Park, even if it's undergone gentrification. There's still stuff to do that people who don't like BS like Starbucks can handle. There is almost nothing "Big 10 Stronghold" about it outside of a few places. If you think that, then you're completely blind. Tell that to the people who hang out at places like Flat Iron, Double Door, Subterranean, Myopic Books, Reckless Records, etc. Now it's probably "more Big 10" than it was 15 years ago, but it's still not a Big 10 Stronghold. I can't even tell you how many people who live on the north side actually think that Wicker Park is still full on hipster.
Second of all, I can't believe you think that a place like Wicker Park and Lakeview are interchangeable. Ridiculous. WP has gentrified, but most of it is nothing like Lakeview. Not all gentrified neighborhoods are the same.
Third of all, I like Albany Park for different reasons. I don't like it because I can go and have a beer or whatever there. If someone was looking for a hip neighborhood, I would never recommend it.
In any city you're going to get an alternative crowd at bookstores, record shops, or stores that sell bongs. It's not like that is only in Chicago. It still doesn't change the prevailing culture of the city at all.
Location: East Central Pennsylvania/ Chicago for 6yrs.
2,535 posts, read 3,281,063 times
Reputation: 1483
Quote:
Originally Posted by RonnieJonez
Chicago isn't boring, but it's not as interesting as NYC or LA. There seems to be a split in Chicago, some will readily admit this; others will come at you with intense anger regarding how Chicago is far superior to both, or at least close to equal, and if not equal, so close to it that it becomes irrelevant.
Culturally, Chicago & NYC have more in common overall than LA & NYC or LA & Chicago. The mafia history, food cities, similar architecture, similar weather. Both do get boring rather quickly outside of their respective "city center", Manhattan for NYC, loop/Mag mile in Chicago. LA for one has a truly bohemian vibe throughout most of the city and it's not confined to certain neighborhoods. It is definitely unique in this aspect.
LA really doesn't have much in common with either besides being a large American city.
The SPLIT you mention is merely when some give attitude.... as nothing even comes close to NYC. Everyone notes Manhattan in a class its own... The worlds city with London. But the attitude is all others are a Meh ...... the RESPONSE merely can come across as Chicago is far superior.... in some views. They just want Chicago to have its due?
That is NOT A MEH....SLIGHT...LESSONING AS FAR INFERIOR from its downtown to neighborhoods.
CHICAGO truly is "The Most American. City" It does not have to be Manhattan nor LA. The reference to the Mafia and Al Capone..... always makes me shake my head....LOL. You do know Capone was a New Yorker born and bred?? He was sent to Chicago to hide 2 murders out... The rest is history.
After the Great Chicago Fire of 1871 Chicago basically banned tenements and away from mostly Row housing like in the East. Sure Manhattan can gut and dress up former blocks of old tenements... but it wasn't the most pleasant style by far..... You don't move to Manhattan for a quaint small tenement apt. You go for all the worlds talent available and atmosphere of culture.... that Chicago too has its share.
Chicago needs not apologize either to chose to do mostly single homes unattached housing like Cottage-style then AMERICAN Craftsman-style Bungalows on tree lined streets with front lawns and apartment buildings with courtyards either in neighborhood throughout thru city.... over Walls of Row homes and Tenements....it's pleasant not boring to me? Plenty though...of neighborhoods of high density and hipsters/Millennial gentrified areas of plenty of action or high-rise high end living with views to die for too among quaint Victorians and greystones too and a skyline world renowned...
Chicago merely lacks the quantities of NYC and clearly has its own Style and Vibe. But you surely can find some of the worlds top architecture, museums, restaurants, hotels and urban vibrancy..... that ain't just a meh....Truly you know you are in the quintessential American city. Lacking quantities of another larger city does not equate to ....LESS INTERESTING EITHER.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
