U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 01-16-2018, 09:24 PM
 
Location: Chibostoncaliseattle
1,644 posts, read 745,848 times
Reputation: 1432

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by StewartsIceCream View Post
Negative Boomer stereotypes coupled with heavy positive marketing doesn't really equate to anything conflicting.

The point is, Philadelphia just leaves the negative stereotypes out there without any sort of counter marketing, which Boston does.
You know, I know, the OP knows, The General knows, and even google knows, Philadelphia has a bad reputation. A downright, cannot-be-totally-explained kind of bad reputation.

Often featured on slimy "Ugliest City in the Country" lists. High on the murder rate lists. High on the obesity rate lists. Aesthetically, it still carries the reputational burden of being a broken down concrete smoke stack city, equal parts rust belt as it is east coast. And despite the war cries of this thread, it does live in the shadows of NYC/DC as some posters have alluded to.

Now, I know what Phila is. Cool, hip, progressive- killer music scene, great food. There is charm in the rough nooks and crannies, and it's a city with a modern edge. All of this is true.

We can debate Boston's reputation until the cows come home. But, I consider myself very lucky to have traveled a lot (and I'm sure you have to) and have lived all over, and I think there is a wide WIDE gap in reputation among BosWas cities. Boston is often seen as stuffy, aggressive, liberal, buttoned up, upscale (though a few of those adjectives always contradict themselves in my head). NYC is everything. We've established Philadelphia. DC is kind of in the same boat as Boston, with additional notions around the feelings of politics and lawyers.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-16-2018, 09:34 PM
 
Location: Chibostoncaliseattle
1,644 posts, read 745,848 times
Reputation: 1432
Quote:
Originally Posted by StewartsIceCream View Post
There is way more Victorian architecture in both cities than colonial. It was a more populated period. Boston also is 1/3 the size of Philadelphia. It's % of Georgian or Federal housing is much smaller compared to Victorian, and much smaller in actual area than Philadelphia's share. Outside of that, Boston has a **** ton of triple deckers which are more contemporary neighborhoods and single unit homes, whereas Philadelphia has far more rowhomes (obviously) but also has it's share of single family as well. I actually think Philadelphia has more varying styles of architecture than Boston. Check me on that Philadelphians.
Downtown Boston proper has a lot of triple deckers? Are you thinking about the suburbs of Boston? Like Somerville? The only areas of Boston proper that have triple deckers are far from the center of the city. Dorchester is a good example.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-16-2018, 09:36 PM
 
Location: Chibostoncaliseattle
1,644 posts, read 745,848 times
Reputation: 1432
Quote:
Originally Posted by StewartsIceCream View Post
The worst of Philadelphia would be it's reputation for being dirty, it's murder rate and it's sports fans. That's about it that I can come up with.

Anything else?
On top of what I've already listed? Sports fans should round out the list.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-16-2018, 09:39 PM
 
Location: Chibostoncaliseattle
1,644 posts, read 745,848 times
Reputation: 1432
Quote:
Originally Posted by StewartsIceCream View Post
Right, and when wasn't Dorchester considered Boston?
I'll repeat- Dorchester is a good example of an area of Boston that is far from the center of the city. In those areas, you'll see triple deckers. In downtown proper? Not a single one.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-16-2018, 09:41 PM
 
Location: Chibostoncaliseattle
1,644 posts, read 745,848 times
Reputation: 1432
Quote:
Originally Posted by StewartsIceCream View Post
Right, and when wasn't Dorchester considered Boston?

The majority of Boston looks like this. Folks that spend too much time downtown don't know this.

Boston a boring city?
Hahaha I like the IHOP comment on this thread. Falls a few below the OP.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-16-2018, 09:42 PM
 
Location: Chibostoncaliseattle
1,644 posts, read 745,848 times
Reputation: 1432
Quote:
Originally Posted by StewartsIceCream View Post
Would saying that Boston has more negative stereotypes than Philadelphia be fair here?

I don't know anyone knocking Philadelphia for it's street grid (lack there of) or it's accents.

In the Northeast when it comes to city complaints, it's the usual: rude, accents, obnoxious sports fans, weather, traffic, etc.
I would say that Boston and Philly are in a two person race when it comes to the most hated sports fans. Likely more similar than different.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-16-2018, 09:43 PM
 
1,325 posts, read 679,610 times
Reputation: 1084
Quote:
Originally Posted by mwj119 View Post
Downtown Boston proper has a lot of triple deckers? Are you thinking about the suburbs of Boston? Like Somerville? The only areas of Boston proper that have triple deckers are far from the center of the city. Dorchester is a good example.
He never said downtown, I mean come on, there's a ton of triple deckers in Boston. And there are beautiful triple decker neighborhoods if they're kept up. Charestown and South Boston have beautiful triple decker neighborhoods. They're both very close to downtown Boston.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-16-2018, 09:45 PM
 
Location: Chibostoncaliseattle
1,644 posts, read 745,848 times
Reputation: 1432
Quote:
Originally Posted by The_General View Post
He never said downtown, I mean come on, there's a ton of triple deckers in Boston. And there are beautiful triple decker neighborhoods if they're kept up. Charestown and South Boston have beautiful triple decker neighborhoods. They're both very close to downtown Boston.
A miniscule % of those neighborhoods are triple deckers, especially after the last decade of building. Actually, a good majority of Southie is compromised of psuedo rowhouses. Like colonial siding, new-age rowhouse looking condos. Cambridge or Somerville? A good %.

EDIT: I associate a triple decker as three distinct separate units that generally have porches on all three floors. If we are talking apartment buildings/SFH that are three stories, there are plenty of those. I'm referencing the style.

Last edited by mwj119; 01-16-2018 at 09:55 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-16-2018, 10:34 PM
 
Location: Germantown, Philadelphia
3,666 posts, read 1,780,395 times
Reputation: 2215
Quote:
Originally Posted by StewartsIceCream View Post
Boston is slightly older and I knew that it was settled by Swedes prior. Some of the oldest buildings are Swedish.
Are you thinking of Gloria Dei (Old Swedes') Church?

I'm not sure that structure predates William Penn's laying out the city just above it in 1682.

The Swedes settled primarily in Upland, today's Chester (though there is a borough next door to it that's still called Upland). That city dates to 1644 and is the oldest municipality in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania - and its poorest as well. The old Chester County Courthouse downtown dates to 1724 and is the oldest public building in continuous use in the United States (it now houses a Chester city economic development agency).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-16-2018, 10:47 PM
 
Location: Germantown, Philadelphia
3,666 posts, read 1,780,395 times
Reputation: 2215
Quote:
Originally Posted by mwj119 View Post
You know, I know, the OP knows, The General knows, and even google knows, Philadelphia has a bad reputation. A downright, cannot-be-totally-explained kind of bad reputation.

Often featured on slimy "Ugliest City in the Country" lists. High on the murder rate lists. High on the obesity rate lists. Aesthetically, it still carries the reputational burden of being a broken down concrete smoke stack city, equal parts rust belt as it is east coast. And despite the war cries of this thread, it does live in the shadows of NYC/DC as some posters have alluded to.

Now, I know what Phila is. Cool, hip, progressive- killer music scene, great food. There is charm in the rough nooks and crannies, and it's a city with a modern edge. All of this is true.

We can debate Boston's reputation until the cows come home. But, I consider myself very lucky to have traveled a lot (and I'm sure you have to) and have lived all over, and I think there is a wide WIDE gap in reputation among BosWas cities. Boston is often seen as stuffy, aggressive, liberal, buttoned up, upscale (though a few of those adjectives always contradict themselves in my head). NYC is everything. We've established Philadelphia. DC is kind of in the same boat as Boston, with additional notions around the feelings of politics and lawyers.
Maybe you haven't been paying attention to the tourism ads, but a bunch of people down here in this city that is (to adapt what's been said about Mexico) "so far from God and so close to New York" have been laboring heroically to alter those negative perceptions.

We've landed on lists of Best Cities for Shopping (yes, shopping; the Travel + Leisure readers' poll singled out Third Street in Old City), Best Food Cities, and Most Helpful People (believe it or not).

And nobody calls it "Killadelphia" anymore. Even if our murder rate ticked up last year. It's still way below where it was when that moniker was common.

I left Kansas City to attend college in Cambridge, then my ex dragged me to Philadelphia kicking and screaming 34 years ago. The place grew on me, as it does on lots of people who visit it and ultimately decide to live there. And it had changed somewhat from the city I first saw in 1971. While litter was still a problem - you'll still hear on occasion people refer to this place as "Filthydelphia" - it didn't look as grimy in 1983 as it did then, when my first reaction on seeing it was "This city needs a bath desperately."

The swagger you might detect in Philadelphia today is of relatively recent origin. The city I now live in is not the same city I lived in as recently as 10 years ago.

Oh, and: I agree with you that maybe we should continue to hide some of our light under a bushel. Philly's affordability relative to other large coastal metropolises (on both coasts) is perhaps its biggest ace in the hole.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top