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.
If NYC is generic then the entire country is generic.
Please tell me how NYC is generic?
SF I wouldn't call generic. It's a very unique city in America and no other city really looks like it. NOLA is unique with it's culture. That's why NYC isn't as unique as those cities to me.
? Are you saying that its normal for SF/NYC people to dream of living in LA?
Many of them do, mainly for the weather, beaches, attractive people, space, and scenery. Of course, many in LA also dream of living in NYC and SF for the density, walkability and public transportation.
SF I wouldn't call generic. It's a very unique city in America and no other city really looks like it. NOLA is unique with it's culture. That's why NYC isn't as unique as those cities to me.
No city in America looks like the NYC either. They don't have the NYC's hyper-density, borough/geography setup, 24/7 subway service (Despite the 24/7 service of the Chicago El's Red and Blue lines, this type of overall round-the-clock subway service is still a novelty in the country), the NYC has the most completed skyscrapers than any other city in the world except Hong Kong, The Cloisters is the only museum in America dedicated to medieval art, Times Square (Despite the growing number of carbon copies across the country, TSQ is still somewhat unique, even though most of its offerings are very generic lol. It probably wouldn't be anything too special if it was placed somewhere in East Asia, Southeast Asia, or China), the NYC is probably the only city in the country where the subway will take you directly to the beaches (Coney Island, Brighton, and the Rockaways), Central Park is surrounded by the overwhelming density and fast-paced urban insanity that the NYC has to offer that no other urban park in America has probably dealt with, Manhattanhenge is a unique phenomenon in and of itself LOL, Queens is arguably the most diverse county in the country, the Highline in Chelsea and the Meatpacking District is a very unique centerpiece (Now that's what I call going green ), the NYC is home to some of the country's and world's most iconic and recognizable skyscrapers (ESB, Chrysler, Bank of America, the old & new World Trade Center, Woolworth, Flatiron, World Financial Center, GE Building, MetLife Building, etc.), and the list goes on. There are a plethora of things that makes New York City a very unique place and treasure to both the country and the world. It certainly is in my book! Looking forward to visiting it again for a third time someday.
London isn't as segregated as NYC, and it's white. There's nothing like Harlem or the South Bronx in London. The City of London = Downtown / Financial District. Westminster = Midtown + shopping areas to the south. Canary Wharf = Jersey City waterfront. Whitechapel = Lower East Side in some ways [historically both got eastern European immigrants]
Whitechapel = Lower East Side makes sense, though it seems that LES has seen a lot more gentrification than the borough of Tower Hamlets.
If you're talking just the U.S., you aren't going to find anyplace that looks exactly like NYC, at least not in the dense, core parts.
Probably Philly comes closest in look, but even Philly is quite obviously a different looking city. Some parts of downtown Boston are also semi-similar.
If NYC is generic then the entire country is generic.
Please tell me how NYC is generic?
Actually other cities modeled after NYC tend to be fairly bland and generic as well. There are parts of Atlanta that are clearly modeled after NYC. In my opinion Atlanta looks pretty generic, with very little architecture that really stands out on its on.
I do think many of the big major cities are pretty bland architecturally. Most of the interesting architectures are in mid sized, are smaller major cities. I personally think my hometown of Kansas City has very interesting architecure, as well as Memphis. I've seen some Lexington, KY architectures and they also look very interesting. I would even go as far as to say, Boston skyline looks far more interesting than NYCs.
In my opinion, NYC is a very cookie cutter and generic looking city. And honestly, while I do like NY, there isn't anything particularly unique about it. It's just have more of what you'd find in any other city in the country. Every city has plays, ballets, opera houses, clubs, landmarks, etc. NYC just has more of it. But it's not like there is anything particularly exclusive to NYC that doesn't exist anywhere else. NYC just has it on a larger scale. IMO, NYC is very generic. Generic is does have it's benefits though.
Actually other cities modeled after NYC tend to be fairly bland and generic as well. There are parts of Atlanta that are clearly modeled after NYC. In my opinion Atlanta looks pretty generic, with very little architecture that really stands out on its on.
I do think many of the big major cities are pretty bland architecturally. Most of the interesting architectures are in mid sized, are smaller major cities. I personally think my hometown of Kansas City has very interesting architecure, as well as Memphis. I've seen some Lexington, KY architectures and they also look very interesting. I would even go as far as to say, Boston skyline looks far more interesting than NYCs.
In my opinion, NYC is a very cookie cutter and generic looking city. And honestly, while I do like NY, there isn't anything particularly unique about it. It's just have more of what you'd find in any other city in the country. Every city has plays, ballets, opera houses, clubs, landmarks, etc. NYC just has more of it. But it's not like there is anything particularly exclusive to NYC that doesn't exist anywhere else. NYC just has it on a larger scale. IMO, NYC is very generic. Generic is does have it's benefits though.
Different strokes for different folks honestly. But forreal though, you really think Boston's skyline is far more interesting than New York City's?
To me, Boston's skyline is decent but nothing too spectacular (No offense to Bostonians) whereas NYC's skyline is far more impressive as a result of its sheer diversity in architecture and size and on top of that, the NYC skyline has more notable landmarks too. It may not be as 'attractive' as Chicago's skyline per se, but the NYC skyline is 'beautiful' in its own right. I'm pretty sure you think the same for Boston, but yeah, as the old saying goes: Beauty is in the eye of the beholder
Note:Not my pictures!
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.
LOL, Queens is arguably the most diverse county in the country, the Highline in Chelsea and the Meatpacking District is a very unique centerpiece (Now that's what I call going green 
), the NYC is home to some of the country's and world's most iconic and recognizable skyscrapers (ESB, Chrysler, Bank of America, the old & new World Trade Center, Woolworth, Flatiron, World Financial Center, GE Building, MetLife Building, etc.), and the list goes on. There are a plethora of things that makes New York City a very unique place and treasure to both the country and the world. It certainly is in my book! Looking forward to visiting it again for a third time someday.
