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.
The skyline lifestyle is simply obsessing over skylines, plain and simple. Following any new developments closely on tall and supertall construction. Endlessly photographing buildings from different vantage points. Visiting observation decks. Plotting their construction. Debating their merits with other enthusiasts. Sometimes, illegally visiting a site.
Is it a niche lifestyle? Sure, in the same way knitting or kayaking is. But given the high internet interest, even on here, it's not that obscure. Skylines matter to people--otherwise they wouldn't exist and people wouldn't debate them so vigorously. They are one of the best indicators of a city's power and prestige, and of human ingenuity. The end all, be all? No, as evident by Boston, European cities, etc. But they matter and they are a "lifestyle" to a substantial enough segment of the population. Might sound silly, but there is an adventurous spirit to cracking the skies--whatever floats your boat, right?
Yes, but I'm sure economics has more to do with why they matter than beauty.
I tried Googling "skyline lifestyle" but found nothing. Is it similar to the foamer lifestyle?
Yes, it's economics (most things are in life, really). Ugly buildings hurt the bottom line, though, so aesthetics ARE crucial from that standpoint. Skyscrapers are birthed due to a physical/monetary need, but aesthetics are important literally from the ground up.
And if you mean, judging from the video, by being enthusiastic, sure, quite similar to railway enthusiasm. Just as dorky to the outside eye but just as justifiable a hobby/lifestyle.
Suburban Philly where 5 M + people live. 50 inches of rain a year.250 sunny days. And not an inch of land that doesnt have a positive purpose for humanity. I try to inform people there is a good reason why this was the first area that the forefathers gathered. The USA could have been born anywhere but they chose Philadelphia because of its perfect geography and location.
Rainrock, first you display some random dirt field in Wahington state with endless dirt bikers riding and kicking up dust and then show some untouched Pennsylvania wilderness, then you show this latest comparison. Give it up.
Suburban Philly where 5 M + people live. 50 inches of rain a year.250 sunny days. And not an inch of land that doesnt have a positive purpose for humanity. I try to inform people there is a good reason why this was the first area that the forefathers gathered. The USA could have been born anywhere but they chose Philadelphia because of its perfect geography and location.
I agree with you. Rock Climbing, Biking, Hiking, Kayaking, Canoeing might not come to mind when they think of Philadelphia but there are very good places to go relatively close.
Beautiful dense forests: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...Gap_cliffs.jpg
At that, According to this more people visited the Delaware water gap than the Grand Canyon, Universal Studios Hollywood, and Waikiki Bay in 2008. There has to be something worth seeing, right lol? The big difference really is visually, I think everyone can agree, taller mountains are more pleasing than rolling hills and the diversity of landscape varies more greatly for sure out west.
Last edited by thedirtypirate; 10-21-2014 at 02:32 PM..
Modesto! That's the best you can do? Even people in Modesto don't brag about Modesto--the last time anyone cared about Modesto was when "American Graffiti" came out in the early 70s! But as far as not being "meant for human habitation"--it exists as a large town because it's in the middle of one the greatest stretches of agricultural farmland in the nation. Sure, it's no Scranton, but...
Easily LA for me. Of course I am bias as hel l. Philly's fun in the summer, but still not like LA for me. These cities seem very different to me. Philly is cool in Center city, but much of the city is messed up. I know about the good neighborhoods so please you don't have to inform me of all of the niche's in the city. As a whole it seems more grittier. LA has for me too many options. You can go to Santa monica, Venice beach, Malibu, Pacific Palisades, drive the Pacific coast highway, plenty of hills/ mountains etc.etc. You can go to Hollywood or go downtown. Not many cities have those different extremes. Philly has downtown, south street and the niche' neighborhoods. I just think LA for me is much more exciting. Don't shoot me Philly homers.
Modesto! That's the best you can do? Even people in Modesto don't brag about Modesto--the last time anyone cared about Modesto was when "American Graffiti" came out in the early 70s! But as far as not being "meant for human habitation"--it exists as a large town because it's in the middle of one the greatest stretches of agricultural farmland in the nation. Sure, it's no Scranton, but...
And American Graffiti wasn't even filmed in Modesto — mostly San Rafael and Petaluma.
Couldn't find anything on the skyscraper lifestyle.
go hiking or bicycling to see the skyline? That's what I did last time I was San Francisco, went for a long bike ride to see the skyline.
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.